New York passes massive innocence reform bill…

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.

 

NYTimes Editorial Criticizes Trump/Sessions Decision to Kill New Forensic Science Commission

The evidence as to why this is needed is clear.  Those in this movement had worked for such a commission for decades.  This is a horrible decision that could really set back innocence reform–and justice–for years.   Editorial here

Tuesday’s Quick Clicks…

New Facebook Group on Wrongful Convictions Issues…

If you’re interested in staying up on wrongful conviction issues on Facebook, I’ve started a new group called Blind Injustice.   It will also be a place people can discuss these issues, etc. in an open forum.

Join the group here:  https://www.facebook.com/groups/742898605877949/

Trump Administration kills Forensic Commission

Horrible, horrible news for those who care about accuracy in our criminal justice system.  Read story here.

 

Federal Judge Overturns Arizona’s Diaper Changing Child Molestation Law

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.

Breaking News: Arson Conviction Based on Bad Science Tossed in Illinois

Defendant Bill Amor represented by Illinois Innocence Project.  Click for decision… amor.opinion.dupage.

More pics of the big exonerations in South Africa

Blogged about yesterday here

.

 

Thursday’s Quick Clicks…

  • Maine law makers consider expanding timeframe for inmates to bring innocence petitions with new evidence beyond current one-year limit; prosecutors oppose.
  • New study suggests that when indigent defendants get to choose their public defender, the system works better
  • A new bill under consideration in Montana would require prosecutors to tell defendants that they plan to use an incentivized witness and the terms of the deal made in exchange for testimony. It also would allow defense counsel to request a pre-trial hearing where a judge can weigh the credibility of the testimony and if there is enough other evidence to corroborate the witness’ story. The judge could then choose to bar the testimony as inadmissible or issue a jury instruction, similar to how courts currently review the credibility of some scientific witnesses before a trial starts.
  • Dallas’ exonerees mission to free the wrongfully convicted is the focus of a new film

Maryland Justice Professional Opposes Revisiting Death Penalty

“At a time when there are calls for criminal justice reform, it is important to ensure any reforms are based on sound research and data-driven, fact-based information. Calls for re-establishment of the death penalty in Maryland are not based on the aforementioned.” — Karl Bickel

Karl Bickel, a career law enforcement officer and former proponent of the death penalty, has offered a well-researched argument against making any exception to the repeal of Maryland’s death penalty, implemented in 2013. The state has opted for life in prison without the possibility of parole for its worst offenders. House Bill 881, introduced on February 6, 2017, calls for an exception for first-degree murder cases in which the victim is a law enforcement officer, correctional officer, or first responder.

A key issue for Bickel is avoiding the risk of wrongful conviction and execution of an innocent.

Bickel is retired from the Department of Justice, and has been a major city police officer, an assistant professor, and second in command of the Frederick County (MD) Sheriff’s Office.

Read his commentary here.

The National Registry of Exonerations has identified 116 cases in which a person was wrongly convicted of murder and sentenced to death, before being exonerated.

Big Win for Innocent Men and the Wits Justice Project in South Africa

From the Daily Maverick:

Before convicted murderers Samuel ‘Sampie’ Khanye and Victor Moyo walked out of Kgosi Mampuru’s spiked prison gates on 24 March, Khanye had just one request which wasn’t granted. He wanted to tell prison director Mabuti Tshele that the Constitutional Court had overturned the men’s life sentences and convictions on four counts – including murder and robbery – and ordered their immediate release: “Officials say all inmates sing the same song and Tshele called me a liar when I said I knew nothing about this crime. After 14 years in jail for a crime I didn’t commit, the Court has proved I’m innocent.”

After struggling to prove their innocence for what seemed a lifetime, an elated Khanye (37) and Moyo (35) were vindicated by order of the highest court in the land. Thanks to the combined efforts of the Wits Justice Project (WJP), human rights attorney Egon Oswald, respected Advocate Carol Steinberg and wrongfully convicted co-accused Thembekile Molaudzi, the men left the prison carrying little else besides a heavy burden of betrayal by the criminal justice system. Ironically, North West Judge President Monica Leeuw, who convicted the men in 2004, also signed their warrant of liberation.

Both men had protested their innocence since their 2003 arrest when they were rounded up as suspects – along with six others – following a botched hijacking and murder of Mothutlung policeman Dingaan Makuna. Hoping truth would prevail, Khanye recently agreed to participate in a prison Victim-Offender Dialogue (VOD) programme, to meet Makuna’s family and “tell the truth” to help both obtain psychological closure.

“I told the truth,” says Khanye, “I said I never committed the murder. When I started crying, Tshele, who was at the meeting, told me to stop shedding crocodile tears and obstructing the course of justice.” Moyo refused to meet the family: “I never killed anyone. I know nothing about this crime. The worst part was no one believed me. I saw a psychologist but all she could tell me was ‘be strong’.”

Failed by the police, the courts, legal aid lawyers, private attorneys and an advocate appointed by the Johannesburg Bar Council, Khanye and Moyo can expect no compensation from the State. Nor will Leeuw shoulder any legal consequence for the lost years and shattered dreams of five co-accused men – including Khanye and Moyo – she convicted and sentenced to life in 2004. (The men’s convictions have subsequently all been overturned by the ConCourt.)

“I’m excited but I’m scared to face the real world,” Moyo said outside the prison gates. “I’ve been here a long time and everything is different now.” Luckily, Khanye and Moyo can turn to “old-timer” exonerees Molaudzi, Boswell Mhlongo and Disco Nkosi for support, as they attempt to rebuild their broken lives in the weeks ahead. Mhlongo and Nkosi’s convictions were the first to be overturned in a precedent-setting 2015 ConCourt case.

Mhlongo and Nkosi’s exonerations paved the way for Molaudzi, who spearheaded the long battle to prove the men’s innocence, to appeal his own conviction, and motivated Khanye and Moyo to fight for their freedom. “When Thembekile left prison, he promised he’d do everything in his power to help us,” Khanye says. “He’s a man of his word. Whatever he says, he fulfils.”

It was Molaudzi who first alerted the WJP to Khanye and Moyo’s predicament and persuaded Khanye and Moyo to lodge their ConCourt appeal. This was no easy feat. For starters, Legal Aid was unwilling to assist them and neither could afford R6,000 to print 25 copies of their trial record as required by the court. “My brother gave me R3,000 and I earned R60/month as a cook in prison,” Khanye says, “and I saved every cent my brother and sister gave me for toiletries.”

“I only managed six copies,” Moyo explains. “That’s why I was the second applicant and why we lodged a joint application. I come from a poor family. My father was killed in a hit-and-run a car accident two years before our arrest and my mother lived in a shack when I went to prison. There was no one to help me. My mother was an only child. I have no aunty or uncle. Only she and two of my five siblings stood by me….”

Eventually the men scraped the money together. Assisted by Johannes Mogoba, a fellow-inmate studying law with Unisa, Khanye and Moyo lodged a joint ConCourt application for leave to appeal in April last year. The final ugly twist in the men’s unfortunate tale came after the ConCourt asked the Johannesburg Bar Council to appoint an advocate to represent the men on a pro bono basis and prominent Johannesburg advocate Naome Manaka took on the case last July.

Initially overjoyed, the men’s excitement was short-lived. Manaka never consulted with her clients or informed them of progress, and mostly would not take their calls. The ConCourt fared no better in its attempts to chivvy Manaka along. In spite of letters sent to her on behalf of Justice Johan Froneman and three subsequent letters from the Registrar of the Court asking when submissions would be filed, Manaka failed to respond or even meet her own deadlines. Nor did Manaka respond to four requests by the WJP for comment.

More than five months after Manaka’s appointment, Khanye heard fortuitously via the prison grapevine that she had submitted heads of argument on his behalf to the court: “One of my co-accused heard from his legal representative Advocate Laurence Hodes. I phoned Manaka and asked to see the papers. She said she never had copies, not even in her computer.”

Manaka claimed the delays resulted from the fact that the court was unable to provide her with trial transcripts – an easily rectifiable situation had she consulted her clients, or taken up repeated offers by the WJP to provide her with the transcripts and other documentation.

By the end of January this year, the two inmates were desperate and Molaudzi asked the WJP to obtain copies of Manaka’s submissions from the court. To their horror, they discovered Manaka had only made submissions on Khanye’s behalf, she had conflated and confused the two men’s alibis, the arguments contained material discrepancies and she hadn’t dealt with all the relevant issues. “Manaka just wanted to get rid of our case,” Moyo notes. “She never cared about us, or our freedom….”

Moyo sought solace in prayer, going down on his knees sometimes five times a day. The men knew only too well that the ConCourt was the last port of call in a protracted legal battle to prove their innocence. With their liberty at stake and buoyed by the support of the WJP, who roped in attorney Oswald to help, the two indigent inmates took an extraordinarily brave decision: They instructed the Bar Council to terminate Manaka’s mandate and requested the urgent appointment of alternative counsel.

Steinberg, who last month successfully argued the Sassa matter in the ConCourt on behalf of Corruption Watch, stepped into the breach and lodged replacement heads of argument three weeks later. A few days later, the State conceded that Khanye and Moyo should never have been convicted and the court ordered their immediate release with formal judgment to follow.

The five men’s freedom rested on complicated legal arguments relating to the admissibility of extra-curial evidence of a co-accused which the ConCourt deemed unconstitutional after Mhlongo and Nkosi’s appeal. All five were convicted on the recanted, uncorroborated hearsay evidence of Accused Number One whom a full bench of the NW High Court deemed “a reckless liar”.

A bungled SAPS investigation failed to produce gun residue, independent witnesses, fingerprints or any other form of tangible evidence linking the five men to the crime. In Khanye and Moyo’s cases, identification parade evidence was so poor the court disregarded it. And Khanye told the court during a trial-within-a-trial that he was forced to make a statement after being tortured by the police.

“The police assaulted and beat me until I agreed to co-operate,” the former Brits golf caddy says. “They put my head inside a car tyre tube and covered my face so I couldn’t breathe. Then they beat me with a hosepipe and broomstick. They tortured us for two days, also with electric shocks, to make us confess. They said they wouldn’t stop torturing us unless we told the magistrate what they said. In the end, I signed the statement they gave me.”

Two weeks before the conclusion of their nine-month trial, Khanye was subjected to suffering of a different order: His 55-year-old father, Elsas, had a fatal heart attack and the “high-risk offender” was not allowed to attend his funeral.

“The police kept saying I was the murderer and I was very badly assaulted,” Moyo recalls. “They gave me a statement and told me what to say but I refused. I was at a 21st party in Polokwane. I knew nothing about the murder and had never been to Mothutlung. I brought three people to testify who were at the party. It didn’t make any difference. The court accepted three statements of Accused Number One which all contradicted each other…”

When the men arrived at Kgosi Mampuru C-Max after sentencing, they claim they were forced to strip naked, assaulted, shocked with electric shock shields and tortured for no apparent reason in front of female warders. After their transfer to Kokstad’s eBongweni C-Max prison, designed to house the country’s most dangerous criminals, they were assaulted and tortured again.

Throughout their ordeal, Khanye and Moyo leant heavily on Molaudzi for emotional and practical guidance as they struggled to obtain their transcripts that were needed to appeal their case. Eight years after their conviction, prison warder Levy Maphakane took pity on Molaudzi and asked the WJP for help. Prior to this, the Legal Aid advocate who initially represented Molaudzi claimed his office burnt down and he’d lost all his records.

After a second Legal Aid advocate failed to find the records, Molaudzi, Khanye and Nkosi’s families raised R18,000 between them and paid private attorneys to find the records, even though indigent inmates are entitled to these documents at State expense. When the attorneys eventually delivered the transcripts two years later, more than half the 1,023 page record – including the most crucial evidence – was missing. “We didn’t commit a crime,” Molaudzi says, “a crime was committed against us…”

After repeated requests, Leeuw finally agreed to retranscribe the records and the men were in a position to appeal their case – a constitutional right and a delay Justice Edwin Cameron subsequently described as “egregious”. Their appeal was dismissed by a full bench of the NW High Court. Subsequent Supreme Court appeals were also dismissed without reason.

Despite Molaudzi’s indefatigable personality and constant attempts to buoy their spirits, the men were growing increasingly despondent. Mhlongo had twice attempted to end his life and a third attempt landed him in a six-month coma. “There were many times when I lost hope and thought I can’t continue – especially when Boswell tried to commit suicide,” Moyo says. “He left a note telling his mother it was better for him to die. I felt the same. If it weren’t for my mom who stood by me and my son, Jimmy, who is now 14, I’d have killed myself long ago…

Clearly, Dingaan Makuna and his family were not the only victims of a monstrous crime.

Unlike Moyo, Khanye never saw his mother for two years before his release: “I didn’t want her to visit. Every time she came she cried the whole time until visiting hour was over. I disappointed my whole family. If I wasn’t in this mess, maybe my father would still be alive?”

Fourteen years later, five men and their families are proof of the human cost of judicial error, the fallibility of an increasingly dysfunctional criminal justice system and the fact that not only guilty people find themselves behind bars – especially if they’re poor. “It’s not only me and Victor in prison for nothing,” Khanye says. “There are many, many others….” Sometimes truth is stranger than fiction. DM

Raphaely is a senior journalist with the Wits Justice Project (WJP) based in the journalism department of the University of the Witwatersrand. The WJP investigates miscarriages of justice and human rights abuses related to the criminal justice system.

Photo: After 14 years behind bars for a crime they did not commit, Sampie Khanye and Victor Moyo were welcomed at the prison gates by their lawyer Egon Oswald, Wits Justice Project’s Carolyn Raphaely and one of their also wrongfully convicted co-accused Thembekile Molaudzi. (Photo:Roz Berzen)

Front: Previously wrongfully convicted Thembekile Molaudzi in blue t-shirt

Middle: Wits Justice Project’s Carolyn Raphaely and wrongfully convicted just released Sampie Khanye.

Back: Wrongfully convicted just released Victor Moyo and lawyer Egon Oswald

 

Passing of TX exoneree Billy Smith

By Mike Ware, executive director, IPTX
On March 25, 2017, Billy Smith passed away in Dallas, Texas. Billy was one of the Dallas DNA exonorees who spent 20 years in prison for a crime for which he was proven innocent by DNA. Billy spent the ten years after his release from prison working tirelessly to improve the Texas criminal justice system and to obtain the release of other wrongfully imprisoned persons.
 
The tragedy of Billy’s wrongful imprisonment was compounded by the way he was treated by the Dallas County District Attorney’s Office. In 2001 Billy filed a request for a DNA test to prove his innocence. For the next five years the District Attorney’s Office fought against Billy receiving this test. In 2005 a unanimous opinion from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ordered the DNA test to proceed in Billy’s case. The court’s opinion, in strong and clear language, recognized that the District Attorney’s Office never had a legitimate basis to oppose Billy receiving the DNA test. The DNA test was then performed, proving Billy’s innocence and in 2006 he was finally released from prison.
 
The resistance to Billy receiving a DNA test was by the Dallas County District Attorney’s Office prior to Craig Watkins taking office as District Attorney in 2007 and establishing the nations first District Attorney’s Office Conviction Integrity Unit. Since it’s inception the Dallas County Conviction Integrity Unit has identified other wrongfully imprisoned persons who were also denied DNA testing under the previous District Attorney’s administration and worked to ensure that innocent persons are not in prison.
 
Nevertheless it is important that we not forget what the “old days” were like. Under the attitude and approach taken by the Dallas District Attorney’s Office when Billy was fighting to prove his innocence, justice took a back seat to protecting and upholding convictions. And that attitude and approach is still prevalent in prosecutor’s offices throughout Texas and the entire country. Even some Dallas County prosecutors believe the District Attorney’s Office should go back to the old way of doing things. It will be a fitting tribute to Billy Smith if his case is cited as a cautionary tale of what goes wrong when prosecutors forget that their job, above all else, is to do justice.
billysmith

Thursday’s Quick Clicks…

Injustices multiplied

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.

Exoneree Luther Jones Receives Posthumous Award at NCIP Justice for All Dinner

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.

Wicklander-Zulawski Discontinues Reid Method Instruction After More Than 30 Years

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.”

Click here to read the full press release.

 

Thursday’s Quick Clicks…

National Registry of Exonerations Releases Two Enlightening Reports

Race and Wrongful Convictions in the United States

The National Registry of Exonerations has provided data-supported evidence of significant racial disparity in criminal justice in its report, Race and Wrongful Convictions in the United States, released today. Known murder exonerations in the United States since 1989 — cases in which a person convicted of murder was officially cleared based on new evidence of innocence — indicate that innocent African-Americans are about seven times more likely to be wrongfully convicted of murder than innocent whites.

In the Registry’s analysis of known exonerations, racial disparities were apparent at many points along the criminal justice process. As examples, blacks convicted of murder are about 50 percent more likely to be innocent than others convicted of murder. Murder convictions resulting in exonerations for blacks were 22 percent more likely to have involved police misconduct than exoneration cases of white murder defendants. Black murder exonerees waited three years longer than white murder exonerees to be released from prison (among those sentenced to death, blacks spent four years longer in prison than white murder exonerees). Continue reading

New Attorney General Jeff Sessions “Tough on Crime”

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.

Monday’s Quick Clicks…