From The Innocence Project:
(Albany, NY — April 10, 2017) – The New York Legislature has passed the FY18 budget that incorporated reforms which will greatly reduce wrongful convictions. Specifically, these changes will mandate law enforcement to record interrogations and adopt standardized best practices for conducting police lineups, and respective safeguards to prevent false confessions and eyewitness misidentifications.
“We applaud lawmakers in Albany for taking a tremendous step forward in protecting New Yorkers from wrongful convictions,” said Barry Scheck, co-director of the Innocence Project, which is affiliated with Cardozo School of Law. “I want to especially thank the governor for sticking by these key reforms right through the end of this process, and Assemblyman Joe Lentol for championing the wrongful conviction bill over the past 10 years.”
“The provisions mandating the recording of interrogations are some of the most stringent in the country, which we know will makes a huge difference in preventing false confessions,” said Peter Neufeld, co-director of the Innocence Project. “The new rules for identification procedures, which require that the lineups be conducted by an officer that is unaware of the identity of the suspect, include the most critical reforms. These changes will immediately make a tremendous difference in establishing a reliable and accurate criminal justice system.”
There have been 224 wrongful convictions overturned in New York. In the 30 that have DNA-based evidence, misidentification or false confession played roles in all of them. This ultimately means that every time someone is wrongfully convicted and incarcerated, the person who committed the crime went free, posing a threat to public safety and committing more crimes.
“This has been a long time coming for those of us who have suffered the horror of being imprisoned for a crime someone else committed. No financial settlement or words can replace the decades stolen from us and our families. However, knowing we have finally changed New York law gives us some solace and hope for the future,” said Yusef Salaam, a member of the Central Park Five and now an advocate for interrogation reform.
“We have worked over the years to make sure that what happened to us 28 years ago doesn’t happen to anyone else. It’s incredible to know we finally have made a difference, and maybe our conviction, as terrible as it was, has some meaning,” said Raymond Santana, also a Central Park Five exoneree and New York advocate.
Kevin Richardson, also exonerated of the notorious Central Park jogger rape case, and now a criminal justice advocate added, “If this had been law when we were interrogated, we may have never seen the inside of a prison, but now we can say, these long–awaited changes shows New York’s commitment to preventing the crime of putting innocent people behind bars and allowing the guilty to remain free.”
Rebecca Brown, policy director for the Innocence Project added, “Getting this critical legislation passed wouldn’t have been possible without the help of many people, but especially New York exonerees who never missed an opportunity to explain to lawmakers why these reforms are needed to prevent other people from being wrongly convicted.”
New York has 35 exoneration cases that involved false confessions and 76 where witness misidentification was a factor. If electronic recording of entire custodial interrogations had already been adopted, these numbers would likely be much lower. Recording is the most commonly recommended safeguard against wrongful convictions stemming from false confessions. It deters against coercive or illegal interrogation practices and alerts investigators, judges and jurors if suspects have mental illness, intellectual disabilities or other vulnerabilities that make them more susceptible to false confessions.
The U.S. Department of Justice, National Academy of Sciences and International Association of Chiefs of Police all recommend identification best practices—which includes using a “blind administrator” who is unaware of the suspect’s identity to conduct a lineup and therefore unable to provide unintentional cues—for reducing the risk of eyewitness misidentification.
“We applaud the governor, the legislative leaders and the entire legislature for passing this law to address wrongful convictions, by requiring video recording of custodial interrogations involving serious crimes and reforming eyewitness identification procedures—a long-standing legislative priority of the New York State Bar Association,” New York State Bar Association President Claire P. Gutekunst commented. “The new law is a positive step toward addressing wrongful convictions and rebuilding public trust and confidence in New York’s criminal justice system. It is essential to ensure that those who are innocent of crimes remain free and that the guilty are not free to commit more crimes. Wrongful convictions erode that fundamental tenet of our society.”
“Today, we embrace the passage of the New York Budget. In 2008, I first testified for the passage of legislation that required the electronic recording of interrogations. Year after year, when called upon, I testified before the senate, assembly, city council—anywhere my voice could be heard. Hopefully, from this day forward, interrogations will be recorded and we can avoid as many wrongful convictions as possible,” said Marty Tankleff, a New York exoneree, attorney and advocate.
Judge Jonathan Lippman, Chief Judge of the New York Court of Appeals remarked: “I could not be more delighted that the wrongful conviction legislation for which we have fought for so long has finally passed. I salute the Innocence Project for its stellar leadership and unswerving commitment to ensuring that this day would come to pass. The work of the Innocence Project and the court system’s own Justice Task Force paved the way for this monumental achievement. Today, New York moves one step closer to making the ideal of equal justice a reality each and every day in our state.”
New York has now joined 20 additional states that employ the blind administration of lineups and is 1 of 22 states that require the recording of interrogations.
This critical budget bill had recently gained strong support from the New York Hotel Trades Council and their President Peter Ward, placing their efforts behind what has been a decade-long advocacy campaign for the Innocence Project.
Many players have helped see this bill to fruition and it would not have been possible without the help of the New York State Bar Association and former president Glenn Lau-Kee; Peter Ward and the New York Hotel Trades Council; Families of the Wrongfully Convicted and Lonnie Soury; Kevin Richardson, Yusef Salaam, Raymond Santana, Jarrett Adams, Sharonne Salaam, Marty Tankleff, Jeff Deskovic, Johnny Hincapie, David McCallum, Derrick Hamilton, Shabaka Shakur, Steven Barnes, Sylvia Barnes, Frank Sterling, Al Newton, Fernando Bermudez, Everton Wagstaffe, Doug Warney, Kevin Smith, Dewey Bozella, Barry Gibbs and Alice Lopez, widow of William Lopez.
The Terrible Old Rule that Undermines Conviction Accuracy
Samuel Gross has provided an insightful commentary in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 22 vote (6 to 2) in Turner vs. United States, that affirmed the murder convictions of seven men and reaffirmed “a terrible old rule that has done great harm to the accuracy of criminal trials…”
A professor of law at the University of Michigan and founder and Senior Editor of The National Registry of Exonerations, Gross notes that in half of more than 800 exonerations since 1989 in which people had been wrongly convicted of murder, the prosecution had concealed exculpatory evidence at trial.
Students of the law and of wrongful convictions recognize these instances as Brady violations. In 1964, in Brady v. Maryland, the high court ruled that the government is obligated to disclose evidence that is favorable to the defense if it is “material” to the case. “Materiality” was later further defined as having a “reasonable probability” that the outcome of the trial would have been more favorable to the defendant if the evidence had been disclosed.
But can this rule be accurately applied? Is there a better way that could cure this nation’s “epidemic” of Brady violations? Gross answers both questions in his commentary, “How Concealing Key Evidence Convicts the Innocent.”
Posted in Editorials/Opinion, Reforming/Improving the system, wrongful conviction
Tagged Brady Violation, Commentary, materiality, opinion, supreme court