He was 27 when he went in. Now he’s 72.
This sets a record for the longest wrongful imprisonment in the US.
He was 27 when he went in. Now he’s 72.
This sets a record for the longest wrongful imprisonment in the US.
Would that ALL exonerated people were able to re-insert themselves back into society this easily.
The National Registry of Exoneration has reported 139 exonerations — cases in which convictions were officially vacated as a result of new evidence of innocence — in 2017. A significant finding in the Annual Report (here) is that in 84 of these cases, misconduct by police, prosecutors, or other government officials factored in the wrongful conviction, an all-time record for official misconduct as a contributor to wrongful convictions later vacated through exoneration. But there was also encouraging evidence of increasing activism in achieving exonerations by prosecutorial offices through the work of Conviction Integrity Units (CIUs).
The annual report provides a detailed analysis of exonerations in 2017. Perjury or false accusation factored in a record 87 cases, 62 percent. Another record 29 or 20 percent of exonerations involved a false confession. And mistaken eyewitness identification impacted a record 37 cases, 26 percent.
Fifty-one defendants were exonerated of homicide, twenty-nine of sex crimes, eighteen of other violent crimes, forty-one of non-violent crimes such as fraud, Continue reading
This from CNN today:
“(CNN) President Donald Trump took to Twitter Saturday to lament “lives are being shattered” by a mere allegation in the wake of the resignations of former White House staff secretary Rob Porter and speechwriter David Sorensen following allegations of domestic abuse.
After twenty-seven years of wearing the label “sex offender,” Darwin Crabtree was relieved of his child molestation conviction yesterday, January 17, by a Butte County Superior Court. Northern California Innocence Project Attorney (NCIP) Paige Kaneb made the motion to vacate Crabtree’s conviction based on new evidence of innocence and bolstered by a newly enacted California law.
The law (Penal Code section 1473.7) allows persons no longer convicted or restrained to pursue a motion to vacate their convictions and stipulates the state’s response: When Continue reading
Anyone interested in criminal justice knows that our system is broken. Two recent cases out of Louisiana highlight just how broken our system really is.
The first case is about a now-senior citizen named Wilbert Jones, who was released last week from prison after serving 45 years for a rape he didn’t commit. Presidents Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton (twice), Bush (twice), Obama (twice) came and went, while this innocent man languished in prison waiting for a miracle to occur.
Mr. Jones was a poor, black teenager in 1972 when he was arrested. He was convicted of abducting a white nurse from a hospital parking lot and raping her, and was sentenced to life without parole. The case against him was weak, resting solely on the nurse’s questionable identification of Mr. Jones made nearly three long months after the rape had occurred.
The prosecutor involved in the case appears to have withheld crucial evidence from the defense, including the identity of another man, accused of a rape in a difference case who better matched the nurse’s description of the suspect. This apparently was not uncommon: the prosecutor in Mr. Jones’ case had a reputation of routinely violating his constitutional obligations to turn over exculpatory evidence to the defense.
It took the Innocence Project New Orleans nearly 15 years to gain Mr. Jones’ freedom. And here’s the kicker. Even though the prosecution has said they will not seek to re-try Mr. Jones, they nonetheless requested that bail be set at $2,000. Even more outrageously, the judge granted the bail motion. Let me repeat: a judge set bail for a 65-year-old man who spent 45 years in prison for a crime he did not commit in a case where the prosecution is not planning to re-try him.
Keeping with the theme of outrageous, last week Kevin Smith was released from a New Orleans jail, after serving nearly eight years without ever having been convicted of a crime. In 2010, Mr. Smith was arrested for a non-violent drug offense and placed in the county jail, where he sat, and sat, and sat some more, awaiting his day in court. His case was delayed because of a hurricane, because of a competency hearing, because of motions and who-knows-what else as lawyers for both sides hemmed and hawed about moving forward with the case. In the meantime, Mr. Smith rejected a plea offer of 10 years, which would have ended his sentence in 2015, and finally filed his own motion to be released, arguing that his constitutional right to a speedy trial had been violated. After his lawyers joined his motion, a judge set Mr. Smith free. He earned the dubious honor of having spent the most time in pre-trial detention for a non-violent offense.
Louisiana has the highest rate of incarceration in the country. It is rife with allegations of corruption and misconduct. It disparately impacts poor people of color. The system is simply not working, and it is time for places like Louisiana to do something about it.
Mr. Jones and Mr. Smith are owed far more than an apology by Louisiana. In the meantime, a mea culpa by the State would be a good start.
This piece also appeared in the Huffington Post.
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.”
Today, prosecutors in Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) vacated the conviction of long-time Ohio Innocence Project client Evin King. King was convicted in 1995 of murdering his girlfriend despite no direct evidence of guilt (eyewitness or forensic). He always maintained his innocence, from arrest and trial and then throughout his 23 years of incarceration.
When he is released, which will hopefully be later this week, King will be the 25th person the OIP has freed on grounds of innocence since its founding in 2003. Together the 25 innocent Ohioans spent more than 470 years in prison for crimes they didn’t commit.
Prior to having his conviction overturned and being exonerated, this case was touted as the “oldest cold case ever solved.”
It will be interesting to see where this suit goes, since prosecutors are supposed to have absolute immunity to civil suit for actions taken while pursuing their duties as prosecutor. They can, however, be held responsible for criminal actions.
See the CNN story here.
Arizona’s justice system is truly something to behold. After all, it’s the home of Sheriff Joe Arpaio. And get this – Arizona’s Attorney General and Maricopa County’s Attorney have publicly stated that there are “no” wrongful convictions and “no” Brady violations in Arizona. Really?! Arizon Bradypdf
But here’s one for the books. Arizona actually has a law that says anyone who knowingly and intentionally touches a child’s genitals is guilty of child molestation – without a requirement of sexual intent. So anyone who changes a child’s diaper or bathes a child can be charged with child molestation. All it takes is a vindictive spouse or partner, or even just a casual witness (eg: changing a baby’s diaper in a public restroom) to make a charge. And as you certainly would guess, numerous innocent parents and caregivers have been ensnared by this law.
When the Arizona legislature wrote and passed the law, they specifically removed the requirement for sexual intent. The governor signed it, and the Arizona Supreme Court upheld it.
Recently Federal District Judge Neil V. Wake, in a testy opinion, ruled the law unconstitutional. See that ruling here. Thank goodness sanity has prevailed. Hopefully this will eventually lead to relief for all those wrongfully imprisoned by this bogus statute.
Last week Judge Wake also overturned the conviction of Stephen May, a school teacher and swim instructor, who was convicted largely based upon this law’s definition of child molestation. See the article by Jacob Sullum on Reason.com here.
See the story by Mark Joseph Stern writing for Slate here.
From: Post Register
Christopher Tapp was finally freed from prison after more than 20 years. Prosecutor Danny Clark has released a statement in which he attempts to explain the actions of his office in dropping all counts of rape against Mr. Tapp, but leaving in place the murder conviction (with a deadly-weapon enhancement). Clark’s statement unfortunately does not explain this split, which is peculiar since all of the same forensic evidence used to dismiss the rape charge equally demonstrate that Mr. Tapp had nothing to do with the murder of Miss Dodge. The DNA analysis requested by the Idaho Innocence Project has produced clear results that exclude Mr. Tapp from everything tested. The tests also exclude all of the other suspects that were part of the prosecution theory of the crime. More importantly, the scientific evidence tells a very clear story—one that was totally ignored by the prosecutor’s statement.
Mr. Tapp is not on any of the evidence in this case, but one man is—in every single profile. First of all, his semen was recovered from the victim’s body—before Mr. Tapp’s trial. We now know, through testing requested by the Chris’s legal team (and the victim’s mother), that the same man left a pubic hair on the victim’s face. In DNA analysis completed during the last year—requested by the government—we have also learned that the same single perpetrator contributed DNA to clothing the victim was wearing—both her sweatpants and her sweatshirt. Most recently, in conjunction with a request by the IIP, the prosecutor had key items of the prosecution’s theory tested using the most modern techniques available (including MVac). This is key, since the confession that was spoon-fed to Mr. Tapp (in exchange for an immunity agreement) had Mr. Tapp contacting the victim and her possessions in three places. He held down her hands, he stabbed her once through her shirt and wiped his hands on the shirt, and he moved her teddy bear. It was clear from the crime scene that she had been stabbed through her shirt, and that the teddy bear had been moved. Fortunately, the clothing and bear were preserved, and swabs from the victim’s hands had been taken but never tested.
We agreed with the prosecution that these were the key items that should be analyzed with the most modern technology possible. These items would either show the truth of the prosecution’s theory, or finally put it to rest. When the results were known, they produced a clear picture of what happened. None of the state’s suspects (including Chris Tapp) were on any of the evidence, but in a remarkably clear set of results, the semen donor was consistently on all of them. We now know who moved Angie’s teddy bear, left DNA on her shirt, and restrained her—leaving his DNA on each hand.
For 10 years, we have fought to demonstrate in open court that Mr. Tapp is innocent of murdering Angie Dodge. During that same time, the county continued to test evidence in this case (apparently looking for Mr. Tapp’s DNA). We had just received the final results, when Chris Tapp was offered a deal. He could be freed, without the delays of hearings, a new trial, and possible appeals by the county. Apparently, the prosecutor had realized the absurdity of Mr. Tapp’s rape conviction given all the DNA results, and agreed to drop the rape conviction. But those same results also clear Mr. Tapp of murder. The state tested Miss Dodge’s sweatpants, nightshirt, the pubic hair, her hands and the teddy bear—not just for evidence of rape, but because those are all the places they concluded the murderer had touched.
There is nothing wrong with having an opinion about how a murder was committed, it is the first part of reasoning: hypothesis. But to ignore one’s own results, is to employ neither science nor common-sense. Could the paradox of Tapp’s murder conviction have anything to do with an exoneree’s right to sue? A right which Mr. Tapp had to surrender as part of his deal with the county.
The courtroom is about the whole truth and nothing but the truth. A prosecutor’s obligation is to seek justice, not to uphold convictions. Indeed, the prosecutor has an ethical obligation to see that wrongful convictions are overturned, and Mr. Clark fulfilled that duty in dropping the rape charge against Mr. Tapp after 20 years. But the first lesson of logic is that half-truth is not truth. Justice for Chris Tapp is not simply finding him not-guilty of rape or murder, it is finding ¬¬¬him not-guilty of rape and murder. The DNA did not say that he was not-guilty of rape, it said he was not on any evidence—and another other man was. That man held down both of Angie Dodge’s hands, he left semen on her body and a pubic hair on her face, his DNA is on the shirt through which she was stabbed, and he moved her teddy bear. One man is on every piece of evidence in this case—not just the rape evidence. Rape and murder. Truth and nothing but the truth. You cannot remedy one injustice with another.
Hampikian, Ph.D. is a professor of biology and criminal justice at Boise State University and director of the Idaho Innocence Project. Cummins, Esq., is an attorney with the Idaho Innocence Project.
The Northern California Innocence Project recently honored exoneree Luther Jones with the Cookie Ridolfi Freedom Award at the annual NCIP Justice for All Dinner. Jones spent 20 years incarcerated for a crime he did not commit before being exonerated and released in February 2016. Sadly, Jones passed away in December, only 10 months after being freed. According to the program, Jones’ “story of exoneration, release and compensation encapsulates many aspects of the challenges of wrongful conviction and importance of innocence work.” Jones’ son, Ko’fawn, accepted the award on his father’s behalf.
Please take a look at the video below, honoring Jones memory and spreading awareness about his case.
World leader in interview and interrogation services Wicklander-Zulawski and Associates will no longer be teaching the Reid technique. The Company announced it’s decision Monday in press release citing as a motivating factor the percentage of DNA exonerations since 1989 that have involved false confessions. President and CEO Shane Sturman further explained:
“It’s human nature to deny and defend oneself. Confrontation is not an effective way of getting truthful information,” said WZ President and CEO Shane Sturman, CFI. “Rather than primarily seeking a confession, it’s an important goal for investigators to find the truth ethically through a respectful, non-confrontational approach.” Sturman added, “WZ has dedicated instructional blocks to educate detectives on the causes of false confessions and the risks of utilizing improper interrogation methods. In future classes, WZ will only discuss the Reid Method in effort to highlight potential risks posed in obtaining a false confession, or to illustrate the major advantages of using the WZ Non-Confrontational Method.”
“Because of the possible abuses inherent in the confrontational Reid style, we believe it is time to move away from the practices of the 1970s when it was developed,” Sturman concluded. “While the Reid Method has been successful in solving crimes over the years, there are serious pitfalls and significant risks associated with the incorrect application of the technique. WZ will remain a progressive, evolving organization dedicated to partnering with academics, attorneys, researchers, corporations, and law enforcement agencies around the world to ensure the tools we are teaching are ethical, moral and legally acceptable.”
The newly anointed US Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, in his first major address has proclaimed a policy of “tough on crime” – particularly violent crime.
Here we go again – the “war on drugs” redux. How many prosecutors have been elected running on a “tough on crime” platform? I would say most, if not all.
So how do prosecutors “deliver” on their campaign promise of “tough on crime?” They arrest a lot of people, obtain a lot of indictments, secure a lot of convictions, and send a lot of people to prison. The only problem? A lot of these people may be actually innocent. But they’ve been scooped up into the frenzy of proving that law enforcement is “tough on crime.” People get convicted through intimidating and coercive plea bargains, phony evidence and false testimony, bad forensics, and police and prosecutor misconduct.
Criminal prosecution MUST rest upon the foundations of truth, logic, real evidence, and prosecutorial ethics – not upon hysteria hyped by politicians and the media.
You and see the CNN coverage of Mr. Sessions address here.