Wrongful Conviction Lawsuit Defense Blog : Wrongful Conviction Defense Lawyer & Attorney : Andrew M. Hale Law Firm

On March 4, 2010, a federal jury exonerated a 10th District Chicago Police Department tactical team accused of anally searching a man named Byron Christmas and vaginally searching his girlfriend, Tiffany Banks. The lawsuit alleged that the police officers attempted to cover up the body cavity searches by planting evidence and maliciously prosecuting Mr. Christmas and Ms. Banks. According to the officers, Christmas and Banks were arrested after they were caught selling heroin in Chicago’s Southwest side community of North Lawndale. After two days of deliberation, the jury unanimously found in favor of the officers. The jury further rejected Christmas and Banks’ inflammatory claim that their infant was abandoned in an alley at the scene of the arrests.

Although 911 evidence linking Mr. Christmas to drug dealing was not presented to the jury, the plaintiffs’ story fell apart because Ms. Banks voiced no special concern about her baby when she met with a lawyer and a physician the evening of her arrest.

Mary Ann Spillane, Shneur Nathan and Jonathan Green of the Corporation Counsel's Office represented the Chicago Police Officers. Chris Smith, Ray Smith, and Robert Johnson represented Christmas and Banks. 

Way to go Corp Counsel!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 The battle between the Cook County State's Attorney's Office and Northwestern's Medill Innocence Project continues to brew. In a recent court hearing, defense attorneys for Anthony McKinney submitted an amended post-conviction petition, deleting references to certain controversial evidence. Judge Diane Cannon questioned the motive of the defense attorneys, asking if the controversial evidence was removed in an effort to quash the State's Attorney's pending subpoena. Stay tuned. . . 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Chicago Tribune is reporting: 

Anthony McKinney's attorneys filed a post-conviction petition yesterday that no longer includes affidavits and videotapes gathered by Medill Innocence Project students.  Northwestern hopes that the modified petition will end the states's attorneys efforts to force Northwestern to turn over their grades, grading criteria and notes. "My hope is that by taking out the most controversial evidence in the case that the state will agree" that their subpoenas seeking the information are moot, David Protess said.

As previously reported, McKinney's attorneys have been trying since November 2008 to win him a new day in court. Prosecutors have argued they need the students' material to prepare for the hearing and have filed documents containing accusations by witnesses that the students paid and flirted with them.

Apparently, McKinney believes his petition is strong without this "new evidence." If thats the case, we are not sure why the students had to go out and get it - and allegedly pay for it.  Either way, the students should comply with the subpoena and clear their names.  If Northwestern really wants McKinney out of prison, a simple subpoena shouldn't stand in the way.  If the students did nothing wrong, and there is nothing to hide, why the delay?

What's more important - the documents or McKinney?  

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The plaintiff, Stephanie Orejel, alleged that on December 8, 2007, she was sexually assaulted by Chicago Police Officer Patrick Cain. Ms. Orejel alleged that on that date, she was coming out of her motel room at the Diplomat Motel, located at 5230 N. Lincoln Avenue, when she was stopped by Officer Cain in an unmarked police car. Ms. Orejel alleged that as she was walking to the store, Officer Cain called her over to his car, asked her for her purse and room key, and then used his office to intimidate her into going up to her motel room with him.

Once in the motel room, Ms. Orejel alleged that Officer Cain searched her room for drugs, searched her body for track marks, and then put two of her toes in his mouth. At that point, Ms. Orejel allegedly told Officer Cain that she wanted to leave, and the two of them then exited the motel room and went back down to the car. When they got to the car, Ms. Orejel retrieved her purse from Officer Cain’s partner, who had stayed in the car for the entire twenty-minute time period during which Ms. Orejel and Officer Cain were in the motel room. After retrieving her purse, Ms. Orejel continued on to the store and purchased some chips and donuts.

The jury deliberated for approximately one and one-half days and ultimately returned a verdict in favor of the defendants on all three counts - rejecting plaintiff's bizarre story.  

Officer Cain was represented by Edith Holland and James Thompson of the Law Offices of Joseph Roddy. The City of Chicago was represented by Arlene Martin, Robin Shoffner, and Brandon Keel of the Corporation Counsel's Office. Plaintiff was represented by Blake Horwitz.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In a 12 page opinion issued yesterday, Judge Jeffrey Cole denied plaintiff's motion to compel case files from defense expert Arthur Young.  Plaintiff sought documents in 10-15 cases in which Mr. Young conducted Absorption/Inhibition testing.  Mr. Young has opined that defendant Raymond Lenz's inconclusive findings in the Jerry Miller testing were appropriate.  Plaintiff contends that Mr. Young does not use appropriate methods in interpreting and lacks proficiency in Absorption/Inhibition testing.   Plaintiff provided no evidence to support that and their motion was rejected.  

The case is set for trial on February 22, 2010 before United States District Judge Suzanne Conlon.   

As previously reported,  the police officer defendants were dismissed from the lawsuit after Judge Conlon found that the police did not fabricate any evidence against Jerry Miller and that this was an unfortunate case of eyewitness misidentification.    

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 A Wisconsin judge has rejected Reynold Moore's request for a new trial according to the Green Bay Press Gazette. Moore was one of six men convicted in 1995 of killing a co-worker. Moore's attorneys from the Wisconsin Innocence Project claimed there was "new" evidence - but this alleged "new" evidence turned out to be testimony from a prison inmate who now claimed that Moore had actually tried to prevent the group beating. This same prisoner had testified at trial that Moore admitted to him in jail that he participated in the killing. In rejecting this "new" evidence retired reserve Judge James Bayorgeon stated "It might be said that this testimony and recollections are strongly influenced by wind direction."  Judge Bayorgeon further ruled that even without the prisoner's testimony a jury would have likely convicted Moore.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

ABC7News in Chicago is reporting that MIchael Tilman may be freed this week after 20 years in prison for the murder of Betty Howard in 1986.  Attorneys for Michael Tillman claim that Jon Burge tortured him. Flint Tyalor of the People's Law Office contends Burge "used a form of water boarding, putting water under his nose or 7Up...they put a gun to his head...they beat him,"  The hearing on TIllman's motion for new trial is set for thursday,  Stay tuned....

In July of 1986, someone attacked Betty Howard in her apartment building. Howard was preparing for her son's two year old birthday, but she didn't show up. Howard's son is believed to have been with her until she was found dead a day later.

At the time, police said Michael Tillman committed the crime. Tillman confessed, was convicted and is serving time.

One quick note:  It is quite amazing to see all these people in the last few years who now claim they were tortured by Jon Burge.  It seems like everyone is claiming Burge tortured them.  Don't be so quick to judge. Betty Howard's daughter still belives that Tillman killed her mother. This is not a case where DNA has been uncovered which exonerates Tilman.  What evidence exists to say TIlman did not commit the crime?  

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Boston Globe is reporting that the a federal district court in Boston has dismissed a wrongful conviction lawsuit brought by Cambridge resident James Haley who spent 34 years in prison before a judge overturned his 1972 murder conviction. Haley learned in 2006 that certain police interviews had not been turned over to his attorney. The Suffolk District Attorney's office agreed the evidence should have been turned over and filed a motion to vacate Haley's conviction. Haley was freed on January 18, 2008 and prosecutors later decided not to retry Haley. U.S. district court judge Richard G. Stearns rejected claims that the detectives - now deceased - deliberately withheld inconsistent statements made by key witnesses and found that prosecutors - not the police - were responsible for disclosing evidence to the defense and that in 1972 the law was not clear on whether the prosecutors were obligated to share these witness statements with Haley's lawyer. Haley was represented in his civil suit by Chicago attorney Jon Loevy from the law firm of Loevy & Loevy.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 The February 2010 issue of Chicago magazine contains an article "The Professor and the Prosecutor: Anita Alvarez's office turns up the heat on David Protess's Medill Innocence Project" that discusses the ongoing battle over the subpoena that the Cook County State's Attorney's Office has served on the Medill Innocence Project. The main issue in the dispute is whether the students in Protess's class were acting as reporters. The article quotes Alvarez stating: "These students wrote no newspaper story on this case, they wrote no magazine articles. . . What is the purpose of this particular class? . . .  The whole purpose of this was to gather information for court, to gather information that they believe is going to exonerate someone." The article also quotes DuPage County state's attorney Joseph Birkett: "If you are working on an investigation and are assembling evidence for a team of lawyers, I'm sorry, you may be a journalist, but in that scenario you are an investigator, and the journalistic privilege is not going to apply." A court hearing on the dispute will be heard later this month by circuit court judge Diane Gordon Cannon.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 This Christmas season, the Chicago Police Memorial Foundation's 
"Operation Santa" visited 32 children from several families of Chicago police officers who were killed or catastrophically injured in the line of duty. See the news report on ABC 7 News. What an awesome program - way to go Operation Santa!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 Here's a sneek peek at "The Squeeze" which airs this Friday at 8:00 p.m. on MSNBC.

Check it out!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 A show about the Cook County Sheriff's Criminal Investigation Unit called "The Squeeze" premiers on MSNBC this Friday night at 8:00 p.m. The show follows officers as they try and flip convicted gang members to solve crimes. It has gotten great reviews and should be must-watch TV.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

WNUR News - Northwestern University's student-run radio will be airing an open discussion tonight to address the allegations being made against the Medill Innocence Project. 

 As previously posted, the Cook County State's Attorney's Office has subpoenaed the journalism students for all their documents related to the Anthony McKinney investigation. The States Attorney is also see king the student's course outline and grade information.   The State has evidence that students paid witnesses in exchange for their testimony,  The Students, presumably, deny these allegations.  

The question tonight will be: Are the State's requests reasonable? Can the students legally hide behind a reporter's  privilege?  Should they be able to hide this information?  Can students pick and choose what information they disclose to prosecutors?  What are the implications of such actions? What does it say about the Medill Innocence Project? What's wrong with just putting all the cards on the table and seeking the truth? 

A lot of questions.....tune in tonight to hear the panelists weigh in. 

PANELIST BIOS:

Professor Jack Doppelt

Medill School of Journalism
Focuses on, among other topics, Law and Media Ethics

Mr. Avi T Kamionski

Associate of Andrew M. Hale Law Firm in Chicago
Concentrates practice in Civil Rights Litigation

Professor Laura Beth Nielsen

Director of Legal Studies Department, Northwestern
Associate Professor in the Department of Sociology
Research Fellow, American Bar Foundation
 

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

News of the Cook County State's Attorney's filed brief, accusing Northwestern University Innocence Project students of paying witnesses in exchange for testimony, has made national headlines. The story was picked up by the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and the Associated Press. Nevertheless, no one from the university has demanded the students respond to these allegations. Mr. Protess, the students teacher, has staunchly defended his work and the work of his students. But why not clear their name? Why not cooperate or conduct their own investigation of these claims. Northwestern's response is due in January.  Until then we will continue to wonder - Why is Northwestern fighting these requests? Every day they fail to comply, forces people to question - Is the Innocence Project really so innocent?

If the students were truly paying off witnesses..why would they do that? What do you think?

 

               

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

Chicago Tribune is Reporting:

The Cook County state's attorney's office today contended student investigators from Northwestern University's Innocence Project paid a witness in its investigation to exonerate a man convicted of murder in 1982.

"This evidence shows that Tony Drakes gave his video statement upon the understanding that he would receive cash if he gave the answers that inculpated himself and that Drakes promptly used the money to purchase crack cocaine," according to a filing made by prosecutors today. The filing argues the students acted as investigators, not reporters, and as such aren't protected by press rights.

Prosecutors allege that after conducting a 2004 interview with Drakes, a private investigator working with students paid a cab driver $60 to take from the interview site, a park in downstate Swansea, to a gas station two miles away. That amount was more than the fare and tip, and leftover cash -- $40 -- was given to Drakes; he used it to buy crack at a nearby crackhouse, the filing states.

According to today's filing, Drakes told the state's attorney's office that the students knew he was looking for money, and he knew they wanted help with McKinney's case. McKinney has been in prison for 31 years. Drakes told prosecutors that he had a 7 p.m. curfew the night of the interview, and that the Northwestern students initially said they wouldn't pay for his statement, but that one student later "flashed a wad of cash" at him, according to the filing.

After the student paid the cabbie, the driver recorded the transaction in his log, today's filing states. Apparently suspicious that it was a drug deal or a sting, he wrote: "detective gave me 60, told me to give him 40, gave me 60... gave him change." The "him" refers to Drakes. According to the filing, the driver's log notes the fare for the two-mile trip to the gas station -- normally about $6 -- was $20. "The driver did not claim his $14 tip, he was worried it was drug money," the filing states.

Here is Michael Lane's Interview - He also claims the students paid him cash. 

We hope this is not true  - but If this is true - shame on Northwestern and shame on the Innocence Project.  Instead of rushing to defend the students, Northwestern should open its own investigation into these allegations and turn over all the requested information to prosecutors.  What are they hiding? Clear your name.  

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 

Judge Dow's Opinion: 

This case arises out of a May 17, 2005 traffic stop involving Plaintiffs and two Chicago police officers. Plaintiffs contend that they were in a car with a friend, Jose Garcia, on the evening of May 17, 2005, when Rodriguez, the driver, took a wrong turn onto a dead-end street where Defendants Acevedo and Avalos were parked in their squad car. According to Plaintiffs, the officers stopped Plaintiffs'vehicle, exited their vehicle with guns drawn, forcibly removed Plaintiffs from the car, beat them, and placed them under arrest. Plaintiffs characterize this as "a conventional and (unfortunately) common Chicago police 'beat-up case.'"

According to Defendants, it was Plaintiffs and Garcia who instigated the physical confrontation, not the officers. Defendants claim that Officers Acevedo and Avalos were on their lunch break in a dead-end street when they observed Plaintiffs' car speeding, weaving, and entering private property. The officers stopped Plaintiffs, suspecting that the driver was impaired. Defendants maintain that Rodriguez jumped out of his vehicle and attacked Acevedo. While Avalos tried to subdue Rodriguez, Acevedo approached the car and told Garcia to "show me your hands."When Garcia refused, Acevedo pulled him out of the car through the passenger window, and the two began to struggle on the ground. At that point, Martinez got out of the car and jumped Acevedo from behind. Eventually, with the help of additional officers who responded to Defendants'calls for assistance, Rodriguez, Garcia and Martinez were physically subdued and taken into custody.

Plaintiffs seek to exclude in its entirety the testimony of Bruce Malkin, a proposed expert witness retained by Defendants in this matter to testify regarding gangs and gang identification.

In his expert report, Malkin opines that Plaintiffs are members of a street gang known as the Surenos. Malkin bases that opinion largely on Plaintiffs'tattoos, which he says represent membership in the gang. Malkin also opines that Defendants' account of Plaintiffs' actions on May 17, 2005 -namely, committing an unprovoked attack on police officers -is consistent with Plaintiffs' gang affiliation. For this opinion, Malkin relies on his law enforcement experience with the , during which Sureno gang members often would try to fight him, as well as on his general knowledge that gang culture often requires members to participate in illegal activity to achieve gang membership and respect."

In denying Plaintiffs' Motion to Bar, the Court explained:

"Here, Defendants contend that Plaintiffs, without provocation, attacked two armed police officers. Defendants' theory is that Plaintiffs were motivated by their gang affiliation, which rewards criminality, and by their desire to prove their worth as gang members to Garcia, a more established gang member. Thus, Plaintiff's alleged gang affiliation goes to the heart of Defendants'theory of the case. Malkin's opinions concern Plaintiffs'membership in the Surenos, and the value gangs generally place on criminality. Accordingly, this Court finds that Malkin's opinions are relevant to facts in issue....The average juror is unlikely to be familiar with the kinds of tattoos associated with members of the Surenos gang, or with gang culture generally. Therefore, the Court finds that Malkin's testimony will aid the jury's determination as to whether Plaintiffs were gang members, and how that affiliation may have influenced their interaction with the Defendant officers."

The Court conducted a Rule 403 balancing test and concluded:

"Here, Defendants are seeking to admit Malkin's testimony about the meaning of Plaintiffs'tattoos to demonstrate motive for Plaintiffs' behavior, not merely to show gang membership. The Court does not believe that the probative value of Malkin's opinion regarding Plaintiffs'gang membership is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. Therefore, Plaintiffs'motion to strike Defendants'gang expert is denied."

 

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Chicago Tribune is reporting that the Cook County State's Attorney's Office has subpoenaed Northwestern "students' grades, notes and recordings of witness interviews, the class syllabus and even e-mails they sent to each other and to professor David Protess of the university's Medill School of Journalism." These students claim to have uncovered evidence which exonerates Anthony McKinney, a Harvey man, accused of killing a security guard with a shotgun blast in 1978.  

McKinney is seeking a new-trial based on the students evidence, but the Cook County State's Attorney is seeking to uncover how this "so-called" new evidence has surfaced. Northwestern is fighting back against the subpoena, claiming it is is harassing and irrelevant.   "I don't think it's any of the state's business to know the state of mind of my students," Protess said.

Why is Northwestern getting all defensive? What are they hiding? The State's Attorney is trying to figure out if there is any motivation on the students part to "uncover" exonerating evidence.  The Innocence Project has been quick to criticize the over-zealous prosecutor or police officer for "doing what ever it takes" to secure a conviction.  Well now the shoe is on the other foot.  Students on university campuses are motivated by "the cause" and frequently do whatever it takes - because in their minds the ends justify the means.  Its nice to finally see the State's Attorney's Office question the students motivations.  We don't know the details and truly hope that the students motivations and actions are legit. 

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Boston Globe is reporting:

 

A federal jury in Boston found today that a retired Boston police detective violated the civil rights of Shawn Drumgold, causing him to be wrongfully convicted for the notorious 1988 slaying of 12-year-old Darlene Tiffany Moore. The jury did not award monetary damages, but the case is expected to continue in US District Court on Monday. The 11-member jury deliberated five days before it concluded that retired detective Timothy Callahan violated Drumgold’s rights by concealing that he had housed Ricky Evans, a key prosecution witness, at a Howard Johnson, fed him repeatedly, and paid him $20, according to one of Drumgold’s lawyers, Rosemary Scapicchio.

However: 

The jury rejected Drumgold's allegation that Callahan intentionally or recklessly obtained false statements or manufactured evidence regarding Evans's testimony. It also rejected Drumgold's claim that Callahan deliberately withheld evidence from prosecutors or that police promised Evans favorable treatment on criminal cases that were pending against him.

Seems the jury rejected the notion that the detectives committed any intentional wrongdoing against Drumgold. Jury also found that the detective did not withhold evidence from the prosecutors. How did they still find Detective Callahan liable for violating Drumgold's civil rights?  

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 

 

The Associated Press is reporting: 

Prosecutors are saying a Kentucky man who served about nine years in prison for a shooting death and robbery is innocent. Jefferson County Commonwealth's Attorney David Stengel said Tuesday that Edwin A. Chandler was innocent of the 1993 slaying of a convenience store clerk. Another man has been indicted in the killing. Chandler's attorney, Marguerite Thomas, says a fingerprint on a beer bottle at the scene, along with two witnesses who came forward, cleared Chandler. Chandler was paroled in 2002. Stengel offered his apologies, and said he hoped to help him receive restitution from the state.A judge overturned Chandler's conviction Tuesday afternoon. 

According to WAVE3 (NBC Affiliate) in Louisville KY: 

Chandler, 37, was convicted of killing Brenda Whitfield, a convenience store clerk, during a robbery on September 28, 1993. However, Tuesday another man, Percy Phillips, was charged in the case based on a fingerprint found at the scene.

Chandler was convicted partially based on a confession he says he was coerced into giving. Wednesday, the original detective on Chandler's case told WAVE 3 he never would coerce a suspect and only asked Chandler to tell the truth.

These early news reports don't tell the whole story.  What exactly did Chandler confess to? Is there an explanation for Percy Phillip's prints on the scene? Did Philips know Chandler? Even if the confession was false - was it caused by any police misconduct? 

Just a few months ago in Woodstock, Illinois, detectives were cleared of coercing a confession in the Gary Gauger case, even where the murders were linked to other individuals. 

We can't rush to any conclusions....There is more to the story...There always is.

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 

Jerry J. Owens was convicted of sexually assaulting a nun over a decade ago. For the last ten years he has been proclaiming his innocence. Recently a judge granted his request to conduct DNA testing on hair found on the victim. The Kansas City Star is reporting that the results are in:  Owens' DNA IS A MATCH! Saying you are innocent don't make it so. . . 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 In an interview on Chicago Tonight Jesse Jackson blamed the police in the beating death of Derrion Albert. Jackson said the police were not doing their job well. Really? It was CPD's fault? During part of the interview, the host shows a clip of Jody Weis' press conference where Weis confirmed that the FIRST call to police came from people at the Agape Community Center AFTER Derrion had been taken inside after being beaten. As we mentioned in a prior post, people videotaped the beating with their cell phones - as interested spectators - but apparently made no effort to call 911 or CPD. And it's CPD's fault? When asked about this "code of silence," Jackson blamed that on CPD too! Check out the video and see for yourself. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

 

The New York Times is reporting that a jury has found in favor Detroit police officer Michael Osman who was accused by Terence Hopkins of sticking his finger in Hopkins' rectum as part of a cavity search. The jury also found for Detroit police officer Michael Parish who Hopkins' alleged watched the incident and failed to intervene. Officer Parish called the Hopkins' allegations a "sham"  and the jury obviously agreed, rendering its decision in less than an hour. Congratulations to Officers Osman and Parish for being vindicated!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 The Chicago Sun Times is reporting that the jury has found James Degorski GUILTY in the Brown's Chicken murder trial.

The jury apparently deliberated for less than 2 hours.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 

After deliberating for less than 2 hours, a jury has found James Degorski GUILTY in the Brown's Chicken murder trial. More details to follow. . . 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 The beating death of Derrion Albert was a senseless tragedy. The violent thugs who murdered Derrion need to be prosecuted and locked up. Good police work resulted in four of the assailants being identified already. But, wait, one mother claims her son was not involved. The latest to be charged is Eugene Bailey. The Chicago Sun Times is reporting that "Bailey's mother told reporters gathered at Fenger Monday that her son had nothing to do with the beating and was not one of the people caught on a video of the attack. . . . The policemen don't want to do their homework." Really? Was Ms. Bailey at the fight? Does she have personal knowledge? How many times have we heard "it couldn't have been my son - he never gets in trouble."  Sounds very familiar. And then there is Cortez Spearman, who was quoted in Mary Mitchell's column. Spearman said "The police are out here, but they are not doing their job." Really? It's interesting - on the videotape, the woman presumably shooting the video tells the driver of the car to "pull over" when she sees the fight. She does not use her cell phone to call 911 or an ambulance. Then she proceeds to videotape the whole fight and beating of Derrion, and someone can be heard saying "zoom in." Again, no mention of calling the police or an ambulance. Hmm - police not doing their job - really? And to finish off the Sun-Times trifecta on this issue (all from today's issue alone!), in Stella's column, Stella Foster states "Where were all the police cars and security when this fight broke out? . . . And, I still say, where are the police that we pay to patrol these neighborhoods and streets?"  I go back to my previous statement, can someone tell me when the police were called? The people shooting the video clearly had no interest in calling the police. And are the police supposed to be on every street corner in the City? At every public school at dismissal time? Are the police supposed to walk each kid home to his house? As our blog states, "Don't blame the Cops!"

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

According to an article published today on reason.com - "its still an open question." They explain:

In November, the Supreme Court will hear arguments on Pottawattamie v. McGhee in order to resolve it. The facts of the case aren't in dispute. In 1978, a retired Iowa police captain was killed by a shotgun blast while working as a private security guard. Prosecutors Joseph Hrvol and David Richter then worked with local police to manufacture evidence against the two chief suspects, Terry Harrington and Curtis McGhee, Jr. The two men were convicted of the murder in separate trials, and each was sentenced to life without parole. The Iowa Supreme Court set aside both convictions in 2003, citing exculpatory evidence pointing to another suspect that was withheld from defense counsel in both trials. Both men were eventually released from prison. Seeking damages for losing 25 years of their lives, they brought a civil rights suit against the police, prosecutors, and county that convicted them.

[Currently prosecutors enjoy absolute immunity, but , t]he Court has put one small dent in the absolute immunity shield enjoyed by prosecutors. In the 1993 case Buckley v. Fitzsimmons, it ruled that prosecutors who act as investigators in a case are subject to the more limited qualified immunity afforded to police officers with respect to the actions they take as investigators. Qualified immunity is still a high hurdle; it doesn't exactly open prosecutors up to a barrage of lawsuits. A claimant must show that a state actor violated his "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights," as those rights are understood by a "reasonable person" (as distinguished from a legal professional). Under Buckley, prosecutors who violate the clear constitutional rights of a defendant while serving an investigatory role can be sued, but once they assume the role of a prosecutor, they're immune.

So should prosecutors be able to skirt wrongful conviction lawsuits based on immunity? Should the police be left to hold the bag alone? Prosecutors will tell you they rely on information given to them by the officers when they prosecute their cases - and that they have no role in investigating the case. But is that really the case? Prosecutors clearly want to get convictions and take full control of a case after it is approved for felony charges (if not earlier). They actually spend more time with the case then do the officers. We are not advocating suing anyone - we are just highlighting that is not fair to simply accuse the police in wrongful conviction lawsuits. They take their guidance from the state's attorneys. The only difference between them and the police - absolute immunity. State's attorneys have it and police do not.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

When Jovan Mosley filed suit, John Garcia of ABC news reported: 

Mosley was 19 years old when he says Chicago police coerced him into confessing to a 1999 murder on the city's South Side His attorney says this is an example of a complete breakdown of the justice system. He says police coerced Jovan Mosley into confessing to something as simple as hitting a guy and taking a sip of his soda. Next thing he knew he was facing capitol murder charges. He spent nearly six years behind bars before a jury cleared him of all charges. Jovan Mosley and his attorney (Sean Mulroney) say he had never been in trouble, never been arrested, and was a 19-year-old kid with college plans when he suddenly found himself in the maximum security wing of the Cook County Jail charged with murder and facing the death penalty.              

 

As previously reported, Chicago police were clearly justified in relying on eyewitnesses in arresting Mr. Mosley and although Mosley was acquitted - that does not mean that police did anything wrong. And the Court agreed.  Will John Garcia of ABC Chicago News run the story of Chicago Police being cleared of any misconduct in this case? Contact ABC News and let them know - fair is fair. 

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

United States District Court Judge David H. Coar has granted the City of Chicago's motion for summary judgment in the almost 6 year extended detention Jovan Mosley case.   Mr. Mosley was arrested and tried for the murder of Howard Thomas.  The police investigation concluded that Thomas had been beaten to death by a group of three to five black men in their late teens to mid-20s. The investigation led to the arrest and prosecution of the following persons: Frad Muhammad a/k/a Big Muhammad; Lawrence Wideman a/k/a Red; Marvin Treadwell a/k/a Leno and Marlon; and Jovan Mosley a/k/a Jason, Jovizzle, “My Guy,” and “Frad’s friend."  Mr. Mosley was acquitted by a jury in 2005.  

 

In clearing the officers of any misconduct, Judge Coar's explained: 

The results of the 7-month investigation into the Thomas murder yielded an “honest and sound suspicion” that Mosley was implicated in the crime. From the start of their investigation, the detectives knew that a group of three to five young black men were responsible for the attack, and they learned from Garth and Williams that Fetta, Marlin, and Frad Muhammad were among that group. It is undisputed that Mosley arrived at the scene with these individuals and left the scene with them immediately after the murder. 

During the February 16, 2000 interview, Williams told the detectives that five men beat Thomas during the attack, and that Mosley was one of them. The detectives had no reason to believe that Williams was not a credible eyewitness, and an identification or a report from a single, credible victim or eyewitness can provide the basis for probable cause.

In September 2006, Jovan Mosley's case was featured in  Chicago Magazine, criticizing the Cook County Justice system for allowing Mosely to sit in jail for almost 6 years awaiting trial. Laura Caldwell and Catherine O'Daniel worked on the case. However, it is now clear by the undisputed evidence presented in the federal case, Mosely agreed to all the continuances that allowed his criminal case to linger for so long.  Had he demanded trial - a right provided to every criminal defendant - he would have gotten a trial or would have been let go.

In the end - here is just one more example of the police doing their jobs - good work!!!

Christopher Wallace, Patricia Kendall and Shneur Nathan of the Corporation Counsel's Office represented the defendant Chicago Police officers.  Sean Mulroney represented the plaintiff, Jovan Mosley. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks

We recently highlighted how the Chicago Sun-Times is clearly biased against Chicago Police and would not report on the police officers who were vindicated in the 26 Year wrongful conviction Jerry Miller lawsuit.

Unlike the Sun-TImes, the Virginia Daily Press, a Tribune paper, is reporting that a Federal Judge in Virginia has granted summary judgment for the James City County Police Department in a lawsuit brought by W. Walker Ware IV. According to the Daily Press: 

On Sept. 3, U.S. District Court Judge Mark S. Davis threw the suit out, ruling that Ware's claims were baseless and that his rights had not been violated by his arrest and incarceration. In a 41-page ruling, Davis retraced the entire incident in question, methodically absolving the officers of any wrongdoing. Granting summary judgment required the judge to view all available evidence in the best possible light for Ware, then determine if a jury could rule in his favor.

The $3.5 million suit was brought in January 2008 by W. Walker Ware IV, who was arrested in 2006 for disorderly conduct, obstruction of justice and assault and battery of a police officer. The suit, in turn, alleged assault and battery, as well as false arrest and illegal imprisonment, malicious prosecution and intentional infliction of emotional distress against four officers. The suit also alleged that county policy allowed the misconduct.

County Attorney Leo Rogers said the ruling was a "clear vindication for the police department and the officers."

According to Judge Davis in his Opinion,  based on information provided in the case, the officers were right to arrest Ware and that Ware assaulted one officer, made threatening statements, had been drinking and was uncooperative at the time.

It is sad that we have to blog about the media actually doing their job....But given the lack of reporting on the police side - especially when a frivolous lawsuit is exposed - a reporter needs the occasional "pat on the back."  Thank you Dan Parsons of the Daily Press. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

The Sun-Times' Michael Sneed is reporting that while in town to play Da Bears, Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger donated $6500 for a dog to be added to the K9 unit of the Cook County Sheriff's Department. Sneed states that Ben's parents "instilled in him a love and respect for animals . . . as well as the men and women who protect us." Nice to hear!

Way to go Big Ben! 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 

This is a follow-up post regarding Tyrone Noling, who claims he is innocent for the 1996 murder of an elderly couple, Bearnhardt & Cora Hartig. Noling was fingered by three of his buddies, some of whom were testifying under a grant of immunity. Last year, Judge Donald C. Nugent of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio denied Tyrone Noling's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Here is a particularly relevant portion of the Court's Memorandum Opinion:

"Even if it did not defer to the Eleventh District's findings, this Court would find that Noling's assertion of actual innocence falls far short of demonstrating that he is 'probably innocent.' The three affidavits of the co-defendants, if taken as credible, would require this Court to accept that they had absolutely no involvement in the Hartig murders despite the fact that they were able to supply the police with multiple details about how it occurred. Moreover, the trial testimony of Robyn Elliot, who stated that shortly after the murders occurred, Noling asked her if she had heard about them and became agitated with Wolcott when he thought Wolcott had called the police, belies the self-interested assertions of the co-defendants that none of them had any involvement in the murders. The co-defendants' affidavits serve only to contradict, but not undermine, the inculpating trial testimony. They do not establish that Noling is 'probably innocent' of the Hartig murders." (Memorandum Opinion at p. 37).

We doubt that tip line phone is ringing. . . 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 

 Tyrone Noling was convicted in 1996 of murdering Bearnhardt and Cora Hartis, both 81 at the time of their death. Noling was a local thug with a long rap sheet who had previously been busted for robbing elderly victims. His friends implicated him in the shooting but later conveniently claimed that they were coerced into fingering their buddy. But the Beacon Journal is now reporting that Noling's case has been taken up by the Washington D.C. law firm of Weil, Gotshal & Manges, LLP. The law firm is offering a $1000 reward for information leading to Noling's exoneration. Hmm...$1000 for new information 13 years later? Wonder how credible any such info will be. In any event, Vic Vigluicci, a county prosecutor, insists Noling executed the Hartig's. In response to Weil Gotshal's attempt to take up Noling's case, Vigluicci said "that's nothing new in capital cases. . . Their object is to delay, delay and delay. It's all without merit."

We will be interested to see if the tip line leads to an exoneration. We doubt it.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 

At a forum for University of Missouri law and journalism students, Missouri University professor Steve Weinberg said that most cases of wrongful convictions are caused by incompetent and lazy defense attorneys.

Nice to finally hear someone not trying to blame the police for any and every alleged wrongful conviction.

Weinberg is the founder of an Innocence Project group on the Missouri campus.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 

In a Dallas News Article Texas Governor Rick Perry defended the execution of Cameron Todd Willingham in 2004. Willingham was convicted of killing his three young daughters in a house fire. Governor Perry said that court records that he reviewed before the execution showed "clear and compelling, overwhelming evidence that [Willingham] was in fact the murderer of his children."  Perry was also quoted as stating that "I'm familiar with the latter-day supposed experts on the arson side of it." State fire investigators and fire officials maintained that burn patterns, cracked windows and other signs pointed to arson. Willingham suffered only superficial burns from the fire after he ran outside the house. He claimed the could not go back in his house to rescue his daughters because the fire was too intense. Barry Scheck of the Innocence Project, who worked on the case, claims that Willingham was innocent. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

According to an article in USA Today - they are reporting:

At least five states — Connecticut, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina and West Virginia — and some major U.S. cities have either revamped or started changing the way law enforcement officials use photographic lineups to identify suspects. Since changing its policy in April, Dallas Police Lt. David Pughes says the department has conducted 1,400 lineups and believes "we're bringing a stronger piece of evidence to court."

"Challenges to lineups were first dismissed as misguided academic exercises, until (law enforcement officials) could see the concrete disasters resulting in exoneration," says Iowa State University psychology professor Gary Wells, an expert on eyewitness identification. Earlier this year, Dallas became the largest police department to stop presenting blocks of mug shots to witnesses. Now, suspects' photographs are presented one at a time by investigators who are not involved in the cases. The new sequential technique is designed to focus witnesses' memories more precisely on who they saw and not allow for potentially faulty comparisons.

But are sequential lineups really better? The National Institute of Justice is not convinced.  According to their research:

So far, research that compares simultaneous and sequential lineups and the use of "blind" administrators has not been conclusive. In a blind lineup, the person who is running the lineup does not know which person the police believe is the likely suspect.

According to an article published by the NIJ:

“At the present time, [when comparing simultaneous and sequential lineup presentations,] there is no definitive sense that one form of lineup presentation is superior to the other,” Roy S. Malpass, Ph.D., professor of psychology at the University of Texas at El Paso..

Malpass noted that certain practices typically used in sequential lineups—such as asking witnesses to make a separate decision on each photograph or individual—have not been examined in simultaneous lineups. Thus, it is unclear whether differences in the effectiveness of the two lineup models are due to method of presentation (simultaneous or sequential) or the presence of these other variables.

Jury is still out. But crimes still need to be solved. Best tool police have to do that is still eyewitnesses - whether a psychology professor likes it or not.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 

Milwaukee police have charged Walter E. Ellis - the "North Side Strangler" - with murder in seven cases. The victims are: Joyce Mims, Quitreaun Stokes, Sheila Farrior, Florence McCormick, Irene Smith, Deborah Harris, and Tanya Miller.

Milwaukee police have not yet charged Ellis with the murder of Jessica Payne, although it is being reported that Ellis' DNA has matched DNA samples taken from Jessica Payne. Chaunte Ott had been previously charged with the murder of Ms. Payne and spent 13 years in prison for that crime before being released.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

BAKERSFIELD Channel 2 News is reporting:

Kern County leaders have agreed to pay a man $5 million after he was wrongly sent to prison for 20 years. John Stoll was convicted in the 1980s on molestation charges that were eventually overturned. He was featured last year in the documentary "Witch Hunt," which told the story of a string of child molestation cases during the '80s that sent 34 Bakersfield residents to prison.

Every conviction was ultimately overturned, including Stoll's, as witnesses recanted testimony and Kern County prosecutors were accused of using coercive techniques to get children to testify against their own parents.

John Stoll's settlement is $400,000 per year for each year he was in custody, far less than the $1M a year rate that plaintiff's lawyers are attempting to set.  As recently addressed, the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals explained that even $1M a year "approach[es] the outermost boundary of what might be thought conscionable" and is "at the outer edge of the universe of permissible awards." 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

 

 

 

 The Chicago newspapers are quick to run a story when a person merely makes allegations of police misconduct. Yet, those same newspapers are not so quick to run a story when it is shown that such allegations were false and there was no police misconduct. The recent case of Jerry Miller is a good example of this bias. Miller sued several now-retired Chicago police officers alleging that they framed him for a rape back in 1982. Miller spent 26 years in prison for the crime that DNA has now shown he did not commit. A federal district court judge recently granted the police officers' motion for summary judgment finding there to be no evidence of police misconduct as a matter of law. If the police had lost this case, this story would have been front page news. Yet, incredibly, when the police officers won this case, the Chicago Sun-Times made no mention of the case at all. This is despite the fact that Sun-Times federal court reporter Natasha Korecki - one who is quick to report about alleged police misconduct - was notified of the 26 page legal opinion. Korecki and the Sun-Times chose not to report on the case and the police officers' victory. Does this seem fair to the CPD? We don't think so. What do you think?

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 

We previously reported Alton Logan, who was convicted in 1983 of shooting a security guard at McDonald's, had been issued a certificate of innocence by Chief Judge Paul Biebel Jr. in the Cook County Circuit Court. Logan was convicted by a jury, but two attorneys last year revealed his innocence. A client of theirs had admitted to them that he had committed the crime, however, they could not come forward until that client passed away in 2007.

As predicted, Logan has now filed a lawsuit. According to the complaint filed in the United Stated District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Logan alleges Jon Burge and other officers withheld material evidence that would have proved his innocence.
 

Noticeably absent from the lawsuit are any allegations against Dale Coventry or Jamie Kunz., the lawyers who have admitted to withholding information that would have exonerated Logan and prevented his alleged "wrongful conviction" from ever occurring.

Jon Loevy of Loevy & Loevy has filed the lawsuit on behalf of Alton Logan.

More to follow on this case
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

             

The New York Times is reporting that:

Scientists in Israel have demonstrated that it is possible to fabricate DNA evidence, undermining the credibility of what has been considered the gold standard of proof in criminal cases. The scientists fabricated blood and saliva samples containing DNA from a person other than the donor of the blood and saliva. They also showed that if they had access to a DNA profile in a database, they could construct a sample of DNA to match that profile without obtaining any tissue from that person.

“You can just engineer a crime scene,” said Dan Frumkin, lead author of the paper, which has been published online by the journal Forensic Science International: Genetics. “Any biology undergraduate could perform this.” Dr. Frumkin is a founder of Nucleix, a company based in Tel Aviv that has developed a test to distinguish real DNA samples from fake ones that it hopes to sell to forensics laboratories.

The planting of fabricated DNA evidence at a crime scene is only one implication of the findings. A potential invasion of personal privacy is another. Using some of the same techniques, it may be possible to scavenge anyone’s DNA from a discarded drinking cup or cigarette butt and turn it into a saliva sample that could be submitted to a genetic testing company that measures ancestry or the risk of getting various diseases. Celebrities might have to fear “genetic paparazzi,” said Gail H. Javitt of the Genetics and Public Policy Center at Johns Hopkins University.

The scientists fabricated DNA samples two ways. One required a real, if tiny, DNA sample, perhaps from a strand of hair or drinking cup. They amplified the tiny sample into a large quantity of DNA using a standard technique called whole genome amplification.

Of course, a drinking cup or piece of hair might itself be left at a crime scene to frame someone, but blood or saliva may be more believable. The authors of the paper took blood from a woman and centrifuged it to remove the white cells, which contain DNA. To the remaining red cells they added DNA that had been amplified from a man’s hair. Since red cells do not contain DNA, all of the genetic material in the blood sample was from the man. The authors sent it to a leading American forensics laboratory, which analyzed it as if it were a normal sample of a man’s blood.

The other technique relied on DNA profiles, stored in law enforcement databases as a series of numbers and letters corresponding to variations at 13 spots in a person’s genome. From a pooled sample of many people’s DNA, the scientists cloned tiny DNA snippets representing the common variants at each spot, creating a library of such snippets. To prepare a DNA sample matching any profile, they just mixed the proper snippets together. They said that a library of 425 different DNA snippets would be enough to cover every conceivable profile.

Nucleix’s test to tell if a sample has been fabricated relies on the fact that amplified DNA — which would be used in either deception — is not methylated, meaning it lacks certain molecules that are attached to the DNA at specific points, usually to inactivate genes
 

What effect does this have on the over 200 people who have been "exonerated"?  Has the DNA been fabricated in any of those cases?

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

According to The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals In Limone v. US $1 Million Per Year "approach[es] the outermost boundary of what might be thought conscionable" and is "at the outer edge of the universe of permissible awards." 

The Court explained:

That leaves the naked claim of excessiveness (a claim that encompasses the government's charge that $1,000,000 per year is simply too rich).  This question is not free from doubt. The district court's awards are considerably more munificent than the amounts that this court would have awarded in the first instance. In our view, the awards approach the outermost boundary of what might be thought conscionable. Cf. Baba-Ali v. State, 878 N.Y.S.2d 555, 568 n.7 (N.Y. Ct. Cl. 2009) (chronicling awards of lesser amounts).

Still and all, the awards are by no means unprecedented, and the "shock-the-conscience" test cannot be administered in a vacuum. What is shocking under one set of facts may be acceptable (even if only marginally so) under different circumstances. See United States v. Santana, 6 F.3d 1, 6 (1st Cir. 1993).

We are frank to say that, here, the awards for wrongful incarceration are high enough to be troubling. But when we take into account the severe emotional trauma inflicted upon the scapegoats, we cannot say with any firm conviction that those awards are grossly disproportionate to the injuries sustained. After all, some cases involving analogous factual scenarios have resulted in comparable damage awards. See, e.g., Thompson v. Connick, 553 F.3d 836, 865-66 (5th Cir. 2008) (upholding jury award of $14,000,000 for 18 years of wrongful incarceration), vacated on other grounds by ___ F.3d ___, ___ (5th Cir. 2009) (en banc) [No. 07-30443, slip op. at 1]; Newsome v. McCabe, 319 F.3d 301, 302-03 (7th Cir. 2003) (involving award of $15,000,000 for 15 years of wrongful incarceration); White v. McKinley, No. 05-203, 2009 WL 813001, at *22 (W.D. Mo. Mar. 26, 2009) (upholding jury award of $14,000,000 in compensatory damages for 5 ½ years of wrongful incarceration); Sarsfield v. City of Marlborough, No. 03-10319, 2006 WL 2850359, at *1 (D. Mass. Oct. 4, 2006) (reflecting judicial award of more than $13,000,000 for 9 ½ years of wrongful incarceration). Consequently, we conclude that the district court's awards must stand.

In concluding that the awards in this case fall short of shocking the conscience, we think it important to make clear that the $1,000,000 annuity selected by the district court as the baseline for its calculation should not be understood as a carob seed for measuring the harm caused by wrongful incarceration generally. Applying a literal reading of the statement in Limone IV that "wrongfully imprisoned plaintiffs were entitled to compensation of at least $1 million per year of imprisonment," 497 F. Supp. 2d at 243 (emphasis supplied), one district court recently has treated the $1,000,000 per year baseline as a floor for damages arising out of wrongful incarceration. See Smith v. City of Oakland, 538 F. Supp. 2d 1217, 1242-43 (N.D. Cal. 2008) (citing Limone IV). We regard that characterization as unfortunate. As we have emphasized, the district court's awards are at the outer edge of the universe of permissible awards and survive scrutiny, though barely, only because of the deferential nature of the standard of review and the unique circumstances of the case.

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Associated Press is reporting"

A federal appeals court on Thursday upheld a $102 million judgment against the government for withholding evidence that could have cleared four men who spent decades in prison — including two who died there — for a murder they didn't commit.

Joseph Salvati, Peter Limone and the families of Henry Tameleo and Louis Greco sued the federal government for malicious prosecution after U.S. District Judge Nancy Gertner ruled in July 2007 that Boston FBI agents withheld evidence they knew could prove the men weren't involved in the 1965 killing of Edward "Teddy" Deegan, a small-time hoodlum who was shot in an alley. "While we reject its finding that the government is liable for malicious prosecution, we uphold the court's alternate finding that the government is liable for intentional infliction of emotional distress," the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said on Thursday. "We conclude that the awards, though high, are not so grossly disproportionate to the harm sustained as to either shock our collective conscience or raise the specter of a miscarriage of justice."

A U.S. Department of Justice spokesman said the agency would only comment after studying the ruling. Attorneys for some of the men, however, were not restrained in their reaction. "It's a good day for civil rights, and I hope that the FBI will be able to put this sordid chapter in their history behind them and redeem themselves to be an institution that they once were," said Juliane Balliro, one of the lawyers representing Limone, Tameleo and their families. Balliro said the quick ruling has left the two men and their families ecstatic. Attorneys for Salvati and Greco did not immediately return telephone calls seeking comment. The district court judge said FBI agents were trying to protect informants when they encouraged a witness to lie, then withheld evidence they knew could prove Limone and the three other men weren't involved in the Deegan killing.

She said Boston FBI agents knew mob hitman Joseph "The Animal" Barboza lied when he named Limone, Salvati, Tameleo and Greco as the killers. She said the FBI considered the four "collateral damage" in its war against the Mafia, the bureau's top priority in the 1960s. Tameleo and Greco died behind bars, while Salvati and Limone spent three decades in prison before they were exonerated in 2001.

A state judge found two Boston FBI agents had allowed Barboza to frame the men because Barboza and his friend Vincent "Jimmy" Flemmi, one of Deegan's killers, were FBI informants who provided evidence in the agency's highly publicized war against La Cosa Nostra. "This case exemplifies a situation in which the end did not justify the government's use of very unattractive means," the appeals court said Thursday. "In its zeal to accomplish a worthwhile objective (stamping out organized crime), the FBI stooped too low."

The appeals court said the district court used a permissible methodology in computing damages. The district court judge had awarded $26 million of the $101.7 million judgment to Limone, who served 33 years in prison. Greco's estate gets $28 million, Salvati gets $29 million and Tameleo's estate gets $13 million; the men's wives, ex-wives and children get the rest of the money. Limone and Salvati were exonerated after FBI memos dating back to the Deegan case surfaced.
 

Just to note.....

That comes out to $1M a year per person they were incarcerated.  Is that reasonable? .... more to follow on this...

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Chicago Breaking News Center is reporting:

A man was shot dead in the Loop and a Chicago police officer was wounded but saved by his bulletproof vest this afternoon, sources say. A man in his 50s was transported from 190 N. State Street and was pronounced dead at 1:09 p.m. at Northwestern Memorial Hospital, according to a spokesman from the Cook County medical examiner's office.

The wounded cop was also taken to Northwestern but did not appear to be seriously injured, according to fire officials. The shooting occurred just before 1 p.m. outside the WLS-Ch. 7 studios near State and Randolph Streets when several officers witnessed a purse-snatching, according to an officer on the scene.

The suspect put a knife to a woman's neck and officers began chasing him, the officer said. A cop was wounded and then fired several times at the man, the officer at the scene said. Witnesses said they heard as many as four or five shots. Bobby Polk said he turned to see a man holding "a butcher knife" to a woman's throat. As many as five police officers were pursuing him. "The policeman shouted 'Stop, stop,' but he didn't and that's when [the officer] shot him," said Polk, 20.

The man was burly, had a white beard and looked disheveled, he said. Chicago Police News Affairs officer Laura Kubiak said calls of a shooting on the busy Loop street came in at 12:49 p.m.

The officer should be commended - The officer stopped this guy before he continued to be a threat to more citizens on the street.   Great work CPD!!!!!

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

CLTV's, Garrard McClendon is very critical of the state's compensation scheme of the wrongfully imprisoned.  Along with attorney Matt Belcher, McClendon finds it "unreal" that the State of Illinois caps out their compensation at $190,000 for Reeves and Kitchen.  

Why is he so quick to conclude they are innocent? Why credit Kitchen's torture allegations?

As previously posted on July 9, 2009, Kitchen's allegation of being beaten are nothing new and were addressed by the Illinois Supreme Court . According to the Court:

At the motion to suppress statements, the State presented the testimony of four Chicago police officers, each of whom testified that defendant was not beaten and that his confession was voluntary. Assistant State's Attorney Mark Lukanich also testified that he did not see any of the police officers physically strike, threaten, or assault defendant. Most importantly, a videotape was presented at the suppression hearing which showed defendant's exit from the police station to the police wagon. In the videotape, defendant was walking normally and not limping in any manner, nor did he show any visible signs of injury.

Louis Gregory Simmons, a paramedic at the receiving station for the Cook County Department of Corrections Cermak Hospital, testified that on August 27, 1988, he examined petitioner as part of the intake screening process. Mr. Simmons did not observe any injuries to petitioner's body."

Hmm... perhaps there is more to the story....

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

The  Los Angeles Times is reporting:

A Virginia man who spent 22 years in prison for two rapes he did not commit will get more than $632,000 in restitution, following a unanimous decision Wednesday by state lawmakers.

Arthur Whitfield, 54, of Norfolk was convicted in 1982 and sentenced to 63 years in prison. A 2004 DNA test proved his innocence and he was freed. Whitfield needed paperwork stating his innocence in order to receive state restitution, but the Virginia Supreme Court could not issue such a finding — called a "writ of actual innocence" — because the law at that time allowed that only for those who were incarcerated. Whitfield's only hope was a pardon from Gov. Timothy M. Kaine, but because one of the rape victims opposed the pardon it took until April for Kaine to grant it.

"When we have a victim who continues to assert that the individual is guilty, we obviously had to take some time and make sure we had that right," Kaine said Wednesday. Whitfield recently was diagnosed with liver cancer and did not attend Wednesday's special legislative session because he was getting chemotherapy, said his lawyer, Michael Fasanaro Jr.

Whitfield has been working in a produce factory but struggles financially, Fasanaro said. "I'm delighted that we've finally gotten some commitment from the state to pay him some money," Fasanaro said. Whitfield will receive $632,867, according to a formula outlined in state law that compensates the wrongfully convicted based on 90 percent of the state per capital income for up to 20 years.

He will get a lump sum of $126,573 within a month, then the remaining $506,294 will be placed into an annuity that he will receive beginning next year. Whitfield also will receive $10,000 in community college assistance. He would lose any unpaid amount if he is convicted of a felony. Instead of the usual 25-year annuity prescribed by state law for such cases, legislators set it up so that Whitfield would consult with the attorney general's office and other state agencies to determine the best way for him to receive the money. Fasanaro said Whitfield had hoped to get all the money at once so he could buy a house. He currently lives in an apartment, and his father drives him to work. "He's afraid that he's still going to have to work, and he's not going to be able to much longer" because of his health, Fasanaro said. Legislators said they wanted Whitfield to get the money quickly to help pay for medical and other expenses.

Sen. Kenneth Stolle, R-Virginia Beach, pushed for restitution after learning this summer that Whitfield had not been compensated for his time behind bars. "I was extremely amazed at the fact that this guy holds no grudges against the community or the victims," Stolle said. "He probably regrets what happened, but he is completely happy with being out of prison and is not asking for anything."

See also the article in the PioltOnline

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

The Daily Herald is reporting this morning that Three McHenry County Officers have been vindicated by a jury of any misconduct in the Gary Gauger case.

For a dozen years McHenry County Undersheriff Gene Lowery and two former colleagues have lived with allegations they framed an innocent man for the murder of his parents and helped send him to death row for a crime he did not commit. Those claims may have been silenced Thursday night when a jury cleared him and retired detectives Beverly Hendle and Christopher Pandre of malicious prosecution and conspiracy claims brought in a lawsuit by pardoned death row inmate Gary Gauger.

Jurors deliberated nearly five hours before returning the verdicts, which found that even though Gauger was innocent, the detectives had probable cause to arrest him for his parents' 1993 slayings.

Gauger was suing the detectives, and the McHenry County sheriff's department, for $20 million, alleging they falsely reported that he confessed to the murders - acts that ultimately landed him behind bars for 31/2 years, including nine months on death row, before he was exonerated.

On Thursday, it was the detectives claiming vindication.

"Nobody feels good when the criminal justice system fails," Lowery said after the verdict. "Though I feel we've been exonerated, I don't think there's anything to celebrate. "Maybe some of our honor is back," he said. "We were accused of wrongdoing, and we were just doing our jobs."

Gauger, an organic vegetable grower who lives near Richmond, declined to comment on the jury's decision, but his lawyers said they will appeal. "It's a very disappointing verdict," Gauger attorney Matthew Crowl said. "We felt that the evidence was strong, but we understand it's a high burden to meet in a malicious prosecution case." That burden required Gauger to show that not only did the detectives arrest the wrong man but that they did so with an "improper motive" other than bringing the proper person to justice. The jurors declined to comment on their decision as they left the McHenry County courthouse Thursday night. Gauger was living with his parents, Ruth and Morris Gauger, in April 1993 when they were found dead, their throats slashed, on the family farm off Route 173. During 18 hours of questioning, police said, Gauger confessed to the killings. He later was convicted of first-degree murder based largely on that confession and sentenced to death.

About three years later, however, a federal investigation linked two members of the Outlaws motorcycle gang to the murders. Gauger ultimately was released from prison and the charges against him were dismissed. In 2002, he received a full pardon. Gauger testified last week that contrary to the detectives' claims, he never admitted to the murders. Instead, he told jurors, he offered a hypothetical explanation of how he might have done it after detectives falsely told him they had evidence proving he was the killer and suggested he did it during a blackout. He said he repeatedly told investigators he had no memory of harming his parents.

The detectives denied those claims, testifying this week that Gauger never offered a hypothetical explanation and they never lied to him about evidence. During closing arguments, the detectives' attorney, James Sotos, told jurors that it was Gauger's own actions and statements that made him a suspect. "I don't think the police officers misdirected this investigation," he said. "Mr. Gauger misdirected this investigation. There is not a police officer in the world who would not have held an honest and strong suspicion."

More to follow.....

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

We decided to launch our very own YouTube channel. 

Visit DontBlameTheCops YouTube Channel to see the latest media coverage on the Jerry Miller decision.  

Here is the ABC Channel 7 News coverage: 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

         

Barry Scheck and Jerry Miller speak at the Gel 2009 conference about Miller's wrongful conviction case.  Barry Scheck of Neufeld, Scheck & Brustin, represent Jerry Miller in his lawsuit.  

This speaking engagement came just days before United States District Court Judge Suzzane Conlon ruled in favor of the police officers in the lawsuit.  As previously report, Judge Conlon found that the officers had probable cause to arrest Miller.  The court further found that the lineup - where Miller was identified - was fair. 

Although Miller was exonerated on DNA evidence, the police did their jobs and did not commit any misconduct.  

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 

Andrew Hale & Associates has released the following press release which has been picked up by the Chicago Tribune , ABC7 News Chicago , WBBM780 , and the Newswire

Chicago, IL - August 17, 2009 -- A federal district court judge has ruled in favor of three retired Chicago police officers who were sued by Jerry Miller in a federal civil rights lawsuit. Miller was convicted in 1982 of raping a woman at a parking garage in the Gold Coast section of Chicago.

Miller was identified by two employees who worked at the parking garage and stopped a man - later identified as Miller - as he was attempting to drive his rape victim's car out of the parking garage, with the victim locked in the trunk.

After spending 26 years in prison, Miller was released after DNA testing from the crime scene proved that Miller was not the rapist. Shortly thereafter, Miller filed a civil lawsuit, alleging that several now retired Chicago police officers had framed him for the crime by conducting a suggestive lineup and failing to disclose material exculpatory evidence.

Judge Suzanne B. Conlon rejected all of Miller's claims against the officers and granted their motion for summary judgment in its entirety finding as a matter of law that the officers did not engage in any misconduct.

The retired police officers were represented by attorneys Andrew Hale, Avi Kamionski, Ebone Liggins, and Christina Liu from the law firm of Andrew M. Hale & Associates, LLC.

About Andrew M. Hale & Associates

Andrew M. Hale & Associates specializes in the defense of civil rights lawsuits brought against municipalities and police officers. The firm's principal attorneys are Andrew M. Hale and Avi T. Kamionski. The firm maintains a blog dedicated to the defense of police officers in wrongful conviction cases: www.wrongfulconvictionlawsuitdefense.com or www.dontblamethecops.com.

For more information contact: Andrew M. Hale, 312-341-9646, ahale@ahalelaw.com, www.ahalelaw.com

*Source Andrew M. Hale & Associates - Federal Court Case no. 08 C 773

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

 As recently reported, the district court granted summary judgment in favor of three retired Chicago police officers who were sued by plaintiff Jerry Miller in a civil rights lawsuit in the Northern District of Illinois. One of Miller's claims was that the police officers conducted an unduly suggestive lineup. The court rejected that argument, stating: "A lineup does not require five persons with identical measurements and countenances. United States v. Funches, 84 F.3d 249, 253 (7th Cir. 1996). It is undisputed that Miller and the other participants in the lineup were males, black, between 5'6" and 6', between 150 and 170 pounds, and between 23 and 31 years old. Miller was the same height as a filler, one inch taller than a filler, and four to five inches shorter than two fillers. He weighed the same as two fillers, was five pounds lighter than a filler, and was 20 pounds lighter than a filler. The parity level establishes the lineup was not unduly suggestive."  (For more information on this case, see the prior blog post).

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 Three retired Chicago police officers who were sued for allegedly framing plaintiff Jerry Miller received a total victory when District Court Judge Suzanne B. Conlon granted their motion for summary judgment in its entirely. Miller was convicted in 1982 of a brutal rape in the Gold Coast area of Chicago. He was convicted based on the testimony of two eyewitnesses who identified Miller as the man who attempted to drive his rape victim's car out a parking garage where they worked at the time. The parking lot attendants foiled the rapist's escape by preventing him from driving the car out of the parking garage. Miller spent 26 years in prison before being released in 2006 based on new DNA testing which showed that Miller was not the rapist. That DNA testing lead to the real culprit, Robert Weeks, who was already incarcerated for other sexual assaults. Miller subsequently brought a civil lawsuit against several retired Chicago police officers alleging that they framed him for the rape by conducting a suggestive lineup and photo array and by failing to disclose material evidence. In a 26-page opinion, Judge Conlon rejected all of Miller's claims and held that the Officers were entitled to summary judgment. Judge Conlon stated "The police officers are entitled to summary judgment on Count I for [Section] 1983 denial of a fair trial because Miller presents no genuine issue of material fact that the lineup and photo array were unduly suggestive or tainted his trial. He presents no genuine issue of material fact that evidence about the photo array was suppressed or material. And he presents no evidence of a conspiracy. The police officers are entitled to summary judgment on Miller's substantive due process claim because it is not legally viable, and Miller presents no genuine issue of material fact that the police officers fabricated evidence. Summary judgment is granted to the police officers on Count V for malicious prosecution because the undisputed facts demonstrate probable cause to arrest and prosecute Miller. Summary judgment is granted to the police officers on Count VI for IIED because Miller presents no genuine issue of material fact that the police officers fabricated evidence." The court's ruling confirmed what the defense attorneys had been stating all along - that this was an unfortunate case of eyewitness misidentification - not police misconduct. The police officers were represented by Andrew Hale, Avi Kamionski, Ebone Liggins, and Christina Liu from the firm of Andrew M. Hale & Associates, LLC. Plaintiff Jerry Miller was represented by John Stainthorp from the Peoples  Law Office and Nick Brustin, Peter Neufeld, and Barry Scheck from the Innocence Project.

Here is the opinion

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

       

Sgt. James Crowley defends his arrest on national television.  From what we have learned, he has every right to do so.  Unlike the suggestion made by the president that race played an issue here, Sgt. James Crowley responded to a citizen call to the Cambridge Police Department. According to the police report, someone called the police to report suspicious activity.  Sgt. Crowley went to check it out.  He knocked on Gates' door to ask him about this complaint, and Gates went off on a tirade, accusing Crowley of being a racist.  In an attempt to calm Gates, Crowley went out of his way to contact the Harvard University Police Department.  Gates never calmed down and was arrested. Based on the reports and Sgt. Crowley own statements - rightfully so.  

Keep up the great work Sgt. !!!!!! 

Cambridge police are dropping the charges - 

In a joint statement, Cambridge and the police department said they made the recommendation to the Middlesex County district attorney and the district attorney's office "has agreed to enter a nolle prosequi in this matter," meaning that it will not be pursued.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

As is being discussed all over the media:

President Barack Obama said Wednesday that police acted "stupidly" in the arrest of prominent black scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. and that despite racial progress blacks and Hispanics are still singled out unfairly for arrest. "This still haunts us," Obama said.  Obama called Gates a friend, and said he doesn't  know all the facts of the case Nonetheless, Obama said, anyone would have been angry if treated the way Gates claims police in Cambridge, Mass., treated him. Gates, a Harvard University professor, claims he was arrested in his home after showing ID to police who responded to a report of a possible burglary. "Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof he was in own home," Obama said during a prime-time news conference that otherwise focused on the health care debate. Gates' arrest followed a report of a possible burglary. A woman apparently saw Gates force the front door and called police. Police came and demanded that Gates show identification. Gates was arrested shortly afterward for alleged disorderly conduct, a charge that was dropped Tuesday.

Obama, unfortunately, used the opportunity to lash out at police across the county:

"What I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there's a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately," Obama said. "That's just a fact." That disparity is a reminder that "race remains a factor in the society," Obama said.

What does this have to do with anything?  Obama's comments will merely inflame a public that is already critical of the police.  Obama should have used the opportunity to either make no comment or explain that often times people do loose control and act disorderly and need to be arrested - even Harvard scholars - even friends.  Instead, Obama made it  a race issue. This is unfair to Sgt. James Crowley and to the tens of thousands of police officers (of all races) across the country.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Today the Innocence Project released a new report entitled  Reevaluating Lineups: "Why Witnesses Make Mistakes and How to Reduce the Chance of a Misidentification".  The new report discusses several attempts at reforming lineups, including: 

• Double-blind presentation: photos or lineup members should be presented by an administrator who does not know who the suspect is.

• Lineup composition: “Fillers” (the non-suspects included in a lineup) should resemble the eyewitness’s description of the perpetrator and the suspect should not stand out. Also, a lineup should not contain more than one suspect.

• Witness instructions: The person viewing a lineup should be told that the perpetrator may not be in the lineup and that the investigation will continue regardless of whether an identification is made.

• Confidence statements: At the time of the identification, the eyewitness should provide a statement in her own words indicating her level of confidence in the identification.

• Recording: Identification procedures should be videotaped.

• Sequential presentation (optional): Lineup members are presented one-by-one (by a “blind” administrator) instead of side by side.

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Boston Globe is reporting:

The town of Ayer and five of its insurers have agreed to pay $3.4 million to settle a civil rights lawsuit filed by the estate of the late Kenneth Waters, who spent more than 18 years in prison for a murder he did not commit before his sister earned a law degree and helped free him through DNA evidence.  The estate was represneted by Barry Sheck of Neufeld Sheck and Brustin.

Ayer police were accused of coercing false testimony to convict Waters and withholding evidence that could have cleared him. A sixth insurance company, Western World Insurance Group, has declined to settle, but negotiations are continuing. Kenneth Waters was freed from prison in March 2001, and the Middlesex district attorney’s office dropped the charges against him. But he enjoyed only six months of freedom. He died on Sept. 19, 2001, after he fell on his head from a 15-foot wall in Rhode Island while taking a shortcut to a restaurant.

Ayer’s town administrator, Shaun A. Suhoski, said the lawsuit was “a very complex case and, through the very diligent efforts of our legal team, with close oversight of the Board of Selectmen, it appears we’ve reached an acceptable endpoint in this litigation.’’

Kenneth Waters was convicted in 1983 of first-degree murder and armed robbery in the death of Katharina Brow. She was found on May 21, 1980, with more than 30 stab wounds, in her mobile home in Ayer. Waters; his girlfriend, Brenda Marsh; and two of her children, one of whom Waters had fathered, had been living in a house behind the mobile home.
 

According to the complaint filed by Betty Anne Waters, her brother had a solid alibi for his whereabouts when the killing occurred: He had been working a night shift at a local diner and then had a court appearance the next morning for an unrelated matter. Ayer police interviewed him after the killing, but filed no charges, and the case remained unsolved for 2 1/2 years.

 

In October 1982, a man who was living with Marsh approached Ayer police and said she told him that Waters had confessed to killing a woman in Ayer, according to the complaint. She also said she had washed Waters’s bloody clothes, he said. Ayer Police Chief Philip L. Connors and Officer Nancy Taylor-Harris interrogated Marsh. Although she initially denied that Waters had anything to do with the killing, Marsh ultimately relented and said he had come home drunk the morning that Brow was killed with a long, deep scratch on his face, according to the complaint. Police arrested Waters, even though officers had examined him after the killing and found no wounds.

The complaint alleged that Waters was indicted based in part on false testimony before a grand jury by Taylor-Harris that fingerprints found at the crime scene were smeared and useless to investigators. In fact, authorities found a bloody fingerprint on a broken toaster and a partial print on a kitchen faucet that was still running when Brow’s body was discovered. Taylor-Harris knew that Waters had been excluded as the source of the prints, the complaint alleged. Waters was convicted by a Middlesex Superior Court jury and sentenced to life in prison.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Back in 1994, the Illinois Supreme Court stated: 

* "As a preliminary matter, we note that defendant's alibi testimony was obviously inconsistent and contained fatal flaws."

* "In addition, defendant admitted that as Assistant State's Attorney Lukanich prepared the handwritten statement, he never mentioned to him that he was at the pool party. Leslie Jenkins, defendant's sister who offered alibi testimony on his behalf, admitted that she visited defendant in jail more than 10 times subsequent to his arrest. Yet she allowed defendant to languish in jail for two full years before contacting the authorities with personal knowledge that she was with him on the night of the murders."

* "Williams testified that he had driven defendant and codefendant Reeves to deliver drugs and collect money from 'Debbie' and 'Mary' on a number of occasions, accurately described certain details of the Sepulveda residence, and positively identified photographs of Sepulveda and Rodriguez as the women to whom cocaine was sold."

* "At the motion to suppress statements, the State presented the testimony of four Chicago police officers, each of whom testified that defendant was not beaten and that his confession was voluntary. Assistant State's Attorney Mark Lukanich also testified that he did not see any of the police officers physically strike, threaten, or assault defendant. Most importantly, a videotape was presented at the suppression hearing which showed defendant's exit from the police station to the police wagon. In the videotape, defendant was walking normally and not limping in any manner, nor did he show any visible signs of injury."

More to follow. . . 

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Ronald Kitchen:

Back in 2002, the Cook County State's Attorney's Office filed People's Response In Opposition To Petition For Executive Clemency

Here are some highlights from the State's opposition to executive clemency:

* "As of August 26, 1988, petitioner and c-defendant Marvin Reeves were in custody on the basis of information provided by Willie Williams, a long-time friend of both petitioner and Reeves. Petitioner and Reeves worked for a major narcotics supplier, and Williams would help them deliver drugs to their sellers (and collect the money owed to them), including on a regular basis Rose Marie and Deborah."

* "Shortly after the murders, while Williams was an inmate at the Illinois Department of Corrections, he twice called petitioner (on August 1 and 5, 1988). In each of those conversations, petitioner said that he and Reeves had strangled Rose Marie to death, and suffocated Deborah and the three children with a pillow, because the women owed them $1,225 for drugs."

* Late in the evening of August 25, 1988, petitioner was arrested and brought into Area 3 police headquarters for questioning. Petition gave an oral statement to the detectives incriminating himself and Reeves in the murders. Petitioner later agreed to give a handwritten statement to an Assistant State's Attorney."

* "At around 6:00 p.m. on the day of the murder, Victor Guajardo, Jr., who lived in the home next to the Sepulvedas, saw an older model, yellow, two-door car parked in front of the Sepulveda home. The car was positively identified as the one driven by Reeves."

* "During the State's rebuttal, Detective Michael Kill testified that on August 25, 1988, Eric Wilson, petitioner's cousin, came to the police station. According to Detective Kill, on August 1, 1988, Reeves told Wilson that he and petitioner 'had killed some people who lived on the other side of Western because they owed them some money.'"

"Williams testified at trial that at no time was he promised any sort of leniency from the Cook County State's Attorney's Office."

"Petitioner's claim that Williams learned about the facts of the crime from a July 27, 1988 Chicago Tribune news article fails because Williams told the police two facts which only the killer could have known and that were not in the article: that four of the five victims were suffocated and the Deborah and Rose were dealing in narcotics (confirmed by the narcotics dog search)."

* "the Illinois Supreme Court noted the 'substantial evidence' presented by the People at the motion to suppress, including four Chicago police officers each testified that petitioner had not been beaten and had given his confession voluntarily."

* "This Court further noted that the Felony Review Assistant State's Attorney also testified that he did not see any of the police officers physically strike, threaten, or assault defendant.

* This Court went on to note: 'Most importantly, a videotape was presented at the suppression hearing which showed [petitioner's] exit from the police station to the police wagon. In the videotape, [petitioner] was walking normally and not limping in any manner, nor did he show any visible signs of injury." 

* "Louis Gregory Simmons, a paramedic at the receiving station for the Cook County Department of Corrections Cermak Hospital, testified that on August 27, 1988, he examined petitioner as part of the intake screening process. Mr. Simmons did not observe any injuries to petitioner's body."

* [Leslie] Jenkins also testified that although she had visited her brother in jail over 10 times following his arrest, she did not inform anyone regarding her first-hand knowledge of the alibi until the eve of trial (two years later)."

Is the State now saying that all of this evidence is no longer valid?

 

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

  

The Illinois Attorney General's Office says prosecutors are dropping charges against Ronald Kitchens and Marvin Reeves. The pair were convicted of murdering Deborah Sepulveda (26 years old), her son Peter, Jr. (3 years old), daughter Rebecca (two years old), Rose Marie Rodriguez (30 years old) and her son Daniel (3 years old) on July 27, 1988. There were no eyewitnesses to the murders. Rodriguez was strangled and the other victims had been suffocated. Kitchens had been in prison since 1990 and Reeves had been in prison since 1991. They were recently granted a new trial by Cook County Circuit Judge Stanley Sacks. Prosecutors, however, decided to drop all charges, stating that they could not meet their burden of proof at trial. Kitchens had confessed to the murders, but claimed that a detective beat him and forced him to confess.

 

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 Rosemary Sobol of the Chicago Sun Times is reporting :

Humboldt Park murder has connection to recent wrongful conviction award
Comments
June 30, 2009
BY ROSEMARY SOBOL Staff Reporter
The Saturday murder of a Berwyn man occurred inside a sport-utility vehicle registered to a man who was recently awarded a record $21 million by a federal jury after he spent 11 years in prison for a murder conviction that was later overturned.

The slaying of 37-year-old Freddy Vasquez, of Berwyn, occurred at 7:06 a.m. on the 2400 block of West North Ave. in the Humboldt Park neighborhood, according to Shakespeare District police Capt. Marc Buslik.

Vasquez was sitting in the rear driver’s side seat of an SUV that is registered to Juan Johnson, who recently was awarded the $21 million award, according to Buslik, who said Johnson was not in the vehicle or on the scene of the incident.

A federal jury awarded the money to Johnson June 22 and attorneys for Johnson, an alleged Spanish Cobra leader, said his wrongful conviction was part of a pattern of abuse on the city's Northwest Side by former Chicago Police Officer Reynaldo Guevara, authorities said.

In Johnson's case, at least three people who identified him in the murder later said they did so only after Guevara or others working with him told them to, his attorneys said. The $21 million award was the largest ever for a wrongful conviction in Chicago, his attorneys said.

In Saturday’s murder, a car pulled up alongside the SUV on its passenger’s side and someone inside opened fire, striking Vasquez in the neck and head, according to the captain, who said rounds also went through the vehicle and hit 32-year-old Leticia Vega -- who was sitting next to Vasquez -- in the chest.

The SUV was being driven by Myra DeLeon and 37-year-old Timothy Russell was a passenger, Buslik said, adding that DeLeon was not shot and drove the SUV to Saints Mary and Elizabeth Medical Center.

Authorities said Vega, who was seriously injured, was later transferred to another hospital for treatment.

Vasquez, of 2238 S. Kenilworth Ave. in Berwyn, was pronounced dead at Saint Elizabeth Medical Center at 7:27 a.m. Saturday, according to the Cook County Medical Examiner's office.

An autopsy Sunday determined Vasquez died of multiple gunshot wounds and his death was declared a homicide, according to the medical examiner’s office.

All the people inside the SUV had just returned from a social club when the shooting occurred and all are allegedly affiliated with the Spanish Cobra street gang, according to the captain, who said the slaying may have been a result of an ongoing feud between the Spanish Cobras and the Maniac Latin Disciples.

Police are seeking to speak to Johnson because his vehicle was involved in the incident, according to Buslik.

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

The Houston Chronicle's website, chron.com is reporting:

 A federal jury on Thursday awarded $5 million to a Houston man who spent 17 years in prison for a kidnapping and rape he did not commit, finding the city should pay for its “deliberate indifference” to problems at the crime lab whose false evidence secured the conviction.

Ain’t no amount of money is going to even my scale,” Rodriguez said after hearing the verdict. “I lost my dad and my girls have been through hell. I am grateful, but no money could replace what I lost.” “This verdict says what I think we all know to be true about the Houston Police Department crime lab,” said Barry Scheck, one of Rodriguez’s lawyers and a co-founder of the Innocence Project, which helped secure his release from prison. “They convicted innocent men and the city was indifferent.”

City Attorney Arturo Michel, whose office defended the city, said officials would take a close look at the trial transcript to review questions of evidence and evaluate how the city would assess the case if it were retried before deciding whether to appeal. “The jury was deadlocked on the issue of whether Lee Brown was deliberately indifferent,” he said. “That meant that they had difficulty coming to a conclusion on the evidence.”

A jury of five women and three men deliberated for about two days after hearing testimony from former Mayor Lee P. Brown, who was police chief in 1987, James Bolding, a crime lab manager who testified at Rodriguez’s trial and from Rodriguez himself.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Houston Chronicle is reporting:

"A federal judge ordered jurors to resume deliberating today after the jury indicated Wednesday that it was at an impasse in the case of George Rodriguez, who sued the city of Houston for $35 million for its role in his wrongful conviction. A Houston Police Department crime lab analyst gave false testimony in Rodriguez’s 1987 trial, and Rodriguez was imprisoned for more than 17 years before DNA evidence exonerated him. The jury of five women and three men sent U.S. District Judge Vanessa Gilmore a note Wednesday afternoon, after about six hours of deliberations. The panel said it is at an impasse on the question of whether, as police chief, Lee. P. Brown was deliberately indifferent to the lack of training and supervision in the crime lab and the chance a violation of someone’s constitutional right to a fair trial would result. To get to this point, the jury had to already find that the crime lab employee’s testimony played a substantial role in Rodriguez’s conviction and that the city had an official policy or custom of allowing the crime lab personnel to be inadequately trained and supervised. If the jury can agree that Brown was indifferent to the constitutional risks, it has two more questions to address. It has to decide if the problems with the lab were “the moving force” behind the violation of Rodriguez’s rights and, if so, how much the city should pay Rodriguez." 

Refreshing to see the jury take their time and work through each claim.  Sympathy for Mr. Rodriguez should not be the reason to tag the City of Houston for millions. Plaintiffs must be held to their burden. Stay tuned for jury verdict....

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In reporting on the recent jury verdict received by Juan Johnson, the media is reporting that Johnson was a member of the Spanish Cobras street gang and was accused of beating and killing a member of the rival Latin Eagles street gang. Attorney Jim Sotos, who represented Reynaldo Guevara, a retired Chicago gang specialist, noted that "There were two witnesses who specifically testified that they saw [Juan Johnson] commit this murder. And the two [witnesses] that changed their story did so at the behest of gang leaders." Indeed, it was gang members who recanted their prior testimony and changed their story to claim that Guevara coerced them into identifying Johnson in the murder. Yet, the jury was not allowed to hear any evidence about gangs at all and was not told that the murder involved a fight between two rival gangs and that Johnson was a member of one of the gangs involved in the street brawl. Nor was the defense allowed to introduce evidence that the gang members changed their story in order to get back at Guevara, who was a Chicago Police gang specialist.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

As previously reported, Juan Johnson, the man who recently was awarded $21 million in his civil rights lawsuit, was arrested last year as part of a drug sting on a Chicago street gang. Here' s a Chicago Tribune story about the bust. Tio Hardiman, director of mediation services at CeaseFire, where Johnson was allegedly working as a violence interrupter, is quoted saying "This comes as a total surprise." It probably comes as a total surprise to the jury in Johnson's case too, as they were not allowed to hear any evidence regarding Johnson's cocaine bust.  

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The jury in Juan Johnson's civil trial was not told that just last year Johnson, as part of a federal sweep of a Chicago street gang, was arrested and charged with being involved in the sale of crack cocaine. Johnson was set to plead guilty to that offense in March of this year but somehow managed to convince the United State's Attorney's Office to postpone his guilty plea until after his civil trial. Johnson obviously did not want the jury to hear evidence that was inconsistent with his claimed testimony of living his life on the straight and narrow. And why did the United State's Attorney's Office AGREE to the postponement?? Here is a copy of the motion Johnson filed requesting the continuance. Johnson managed to keep his crack cocaine offense from the jury, but at the same time managed to introduce evidence that Detective Guevara allegedly (according to who?) had a reputation for framing criminal suspects. Hardly seems fair . . .  

(Photo from LA Times Blog Post) 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

              

A federal jury in Chicago has awarded $21 million to Juan Johnson, who spent nearly 12 years in
prison for a murder he says he did not commit. Johnson was convicted with his brother of killing a man outside a Humboldt Park night club back in 1989 when Johnson was 19 years old. Johnson was sentenced to 30 years in prison. Johnson was able to convince the court to grant him a new trial and he was re-tried and acquitted in 2004. In his civil suit, Johnson claimed that Chicago detective Reynaldo Guevara framed him for the murder by convincing four witnesses to identify him. Johnson was represented by Jon Loevy from the law firm of Loevy & Loevy. Detective Guevara and the City of Chicago were represented by attorney Jim Sotos. THERE IS A LOT MORE TO THIS STORY . . . MORE TO FOLLOW 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

 

Click Here to Watch His Story:

According to news affiliate khou: 

A federal district judge has refused to dismiss a multi-million dollar civil lawsuit against the City of Houston, clearing the way for George Rodriguez’s claim that he was wrongfully imprisoned to go to trial Tuesday. His attorney, Mark Wawro, declined to comment except to say he is seeking compensation for what he has lost.

Court documents indicate that Rodriguez believes the city was complicit in his wrongful conviction by looking the other way as conditions in the city’s crime lab deteriorated over a period of several years.  The 11 News Defenders first exposed widespread problems with mishandled evidence, poor training and faulty test results five years ago. In 2004, a judge allowed Rodriguez to be released on bond after DNA testing cleared him in the kidnapping and rape of a 14-year-old girl in 1987.

Houston City Attorney Arturo Michel said the problems at the crime lab were not the source of the conviction. Instead, Michel points to the dishonest testimony of a crime lab supervisor. “I think what you have here is a person who was simply not honest,” Michel said. “It doesn’t matter how many funds you put into something and how good a program you have, you cannot guard against a person’s dishonesty.” “What we are going to show here is that you have someone who was lying on the stand and it was a tragic consequence,” he said.

On Wednesday, the Houston City Council will consider extending the contract with a private law firm that is representing the city in court. The City Attorney has already paid $50,000 to the law firm of Feldman & Rogers, and Wednesday’s vote would extend that to up to $200,000. Neither Michel nor Wawro would comment on exactly what financial relief Rodriguez is seeking in the case, but Michel said “they began with tens of millions of dollars that they would like the city to pay them in this process.”

Since then, Michel said, confidential discussions between the parties have been underway.  Rodriguez’s suit began with a wide range of defendants, including the City of Houston, Harris County and individuals involved in the case. The other defendants have either been dismissed from the case or have reached private settlements, Michel said.

11 News legal expert Gerald Treece says that Rodriguez’s legal claim his civil rights were violated is traditionally difficult to prove. “There has to be a conscious indifference by a policy or practice of the government,” he said. He added Rodriguez would have to prove city leaders knew the evidence that helped lead to the conviction was faulty and they “simply didn’t care." 

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

          

According to news reports:  

A plainclothes Chicago police officer died this afternoon after being shot in the head and critically wounded early this morning in the West Englewood neighborhood on the South Side, authorities said.
Alejandro "Alex" Valadez, 27, died about 2:40 p.m., police Supt. Jody Weis said.

Valadez is the third officer killed in the line of duty in the past 12 months. Officer Nathaniel Taylor, 39, a 14-year veteran, was shot and killed in September while trying to execute a search warrant against a suspected narcotics dealer. Officer Richard Francis, 60, was fatally shot in July during a struggle with a woman causing a disruption on a bus.

Police sources said detectives were questioning at least one suspect Monday evening, but no charges had been filed. Weis said there was progress in the case but declined to be more specific.

Standing across the street from Stroger Hospital, Weis confirmed that Valadez had died. He said Valadez had been on life support and his family had donated his organs. Weis called Valadez, a "great officer'' who had distinguished himself in his three-year career.

"At the beginning of his career he distinguished himself on a team working on special missions," Weis said.

Weis said Valadez' killing will have a "devastating effect" on the officer's friends, family and co-workers and all Chicago residents.

"[It] should have a devastating effect upon all members and citizens of the City of Chicago," said Weis. "This type of violence can befall a Chicago police officer out doing his job sends a clear message about how dangerous it is in some of our communities."

Family members would not comment on the officer's death but Weis said that Valadez' brother, sister and fiancee are all police officers. He said while the family knew the risks that come with the job he said the family was, "devastated."

Valadez's brother is assigned to the Ogden District and a sister assigned to the evidence and recovered property section. The dead officer's girlfriend also is a police officer who works in the Englewood District, the source said.

Weis refused to comment on the investigation but said police have, "some people we are looking at."

"I'm very confident in the investigative leads that we have right now,'' said Weis.

Valadez's shooting occurred about 12:30 a.m. in the 6000 block of South Hermitage Avenue as the three-year veteran and his partner were investigating a report of shots fired, Weis said at a news conference earlier today after the shooting.

The shots were fired from a vehicle with more than one person in it, Weis said. He refused to provide a description of the vehicle which he said was being processed by police.

Sources said investigators found the vehicle believed to be used in the homicide blocks away with spent shell casings inside that appeared to come from a .40-caliber gun, believed to be used in the shooting.

Other police sources said investigators were "zeroing in" on suspects and hoped to announce arrests soon. Weis would only say: "There are some very good investigative leads right now."

Wentworth Area detectives are investigating the case, he said.

In addition to a head wound, Valadez was wounded in the leg, Weis said.

Valadez was taken to Stroger Hospital in critical condition and died there later.

The officer joined the Chicago Police Department in December 2005 and was most
recently assigned to the Englewood District, police said. Valadez earned a department commendation and 22 honorable mentions.

Investigators recovered shell casings at the scene. Several teams were stationed along Hermitage between 62nd and 60th Streets, including near the field at the southeast corner of Charles W. Earle Elementary School and in an alley in the 6000 block between Hermitage and Wood Street.

Valadez and his partner never let up on assignments and stayed hours after their midnight shift to finish the job, said Englewood Cmdr. Keith Calloway.

Calloway recalled seeing Valadez a few weeks ago at 10 a.m., three hours after his shift had ended, as he worked on paperwork to get a suspected carjacker charged. "These guys never really got tired," Calloway said.

"They'd run from hot car to hot car. Just hardworking and dedicated."

Valadez had an outgoing personality and was warm and well-liked, Calloway said.

As reporters converged on Valadez's neighborhood after his shooting, neighbors said they had heard about the tragedy.

Neighbor Julia Gonzalez, 39, said she had a sinking feeling when she saw the reporters and noticed the police car in front of the officer's home. She said the officer moved into the area about a year ago. She described him as friendly and a "good neighbor."

She said that he assisted her in getting aid to an injured rabbit she had on her property. She said the officer often worked on his home with his father, and she often saw him leave for work in the morning.

"I felt safe living next door because he is a police officer," said Gonzalez. "I pray for him."

At Stroger Hospital earlier today, about 30 people -- a mixture of friends and police officers -- gathered outside the emergency room.

Men embraced other men, crying and talking in Spanish. One woman, who identified herself as a friend, had a single tear streaming down her face. She and two others declined to talk. 

Our hearts and prayers go out to officer Valdez's family.   

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The AP is reporting that DNA tests have confirmed that 37 year old Charles Duman did in fact rape a 4-year old girl. Dumas was convicted of the crime in 1998 via circumstantial evidence and maintained his innocence. The University of Cincinnati based Ohio Innocence Project took up his case and he received DNA testing. Both the prosecutor and victim's mother approved of the testing. However, Franklin County Prosecutor Ron O'Brien filed documents on Tuesday that state that DNA evidence would not exonerate Dumas, and that he was properly convicted.

The Center has seen numerous cases like this, and they are becoming more frequent. See previous blog posts for more examples of DNA testing actually reaffirming the conviction of the man claiming innocence.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

          The Chicago Tribune is reporting: 

"A man who was 13 when arrested in 1993 and convicted of murder has been freed because Cook County prosecutors now believe another man committed the slaying. State's Atty. Anita Alvarez didn't say what evidence prompted her office to push for a judge to vacate Thaddeus Jimenez's 50-year prison sentence on Friday, but said it was the right decision. "I'm happy to be alive today," Jimenez, now 30, said at a press conference at the Cook County Criminal Courthouse, "after spending a little over 16 years in the Department of Corrections." 

Prosecutors have charged a Hammond, Ind., man with the Feb. 3, 1993 murder of Eric Morro. Juan Carlos Torres, 30, is awaiting extradition to Illinois and was mentioned as a potential suspect at the time of the shooting, authorities said. Witnesses had told police they saw Jimenez fire the fatal shot. A man with Morro initially told police Jimenez was not the gunman, but after a lengthy interrogation, changed his story and pointed the finger at Jimenez, authorities said. The case came to the attention of the Northwestern University Center on Wrongful Convictions in 2005. The center conducted an investigation and, in September 2007, sent its findings to the state's attorney's office. The office launched its own review and, along with Jimenez's attorneys, asked a judge on Friday to vacate Jimenez's sentence. The judge agreed. The decision to drop the case was "a powerful example of a prosecutor's office living up to the highest ideals of what a prosecutor should be," said Steven Drizin, one of Jimenez's attorneys and a law professor at Northwestern. Jimenez "would still be locked up today if not for the Cook County state's attorney's office."

Alvarez said her office found no evidence of official misconduct in the original investigation against Jimenez. "This is a situation where we don't see any police misconduct or prosecutorial misconduct," she said, noting the evidence initially appeared to point to Jimenez. She said the case is an example of why there needs to be continued training of police and prosecutors on how to interrogate witnesses and verify witness accounts. During a brief statement Jimenez thanked his lawyers and his mother, saying that because she didn't give up hope, he had the strength to persevere."I survived because of the love and support I received from my mother, who battled cancer and other illnesses while I was away," he said."

You can also read Maurice Possley's article in Chicago Sun-Times 

The Center on Wrongful Convictionsat Northwestern University has published a video on Thaddeus Jimenez's release.  

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

Chicago Tribune is reporting: 

"The number of DNA samples from rapes and other serious offenses that sit untested at the Illinois crime lab for more than 30 days remains alarmingly high four years after former Gov. Rod Blagojevich declared the problem had been eliminated. In 2005, the year Blagojevich proclaimed the DNA backlog gone, it included at least 170 cases. And today, 1,167 cases are taking more than a month to analyze, with nearly half of the DNA samples from rape kits, according to a Tribune review of lab statistics. Sexual assault victims and law-enforcement officials say it can take as long as a year for DNA to be analyzed at the Illinois State Police Crime Lab, the third-largest forensic laboratory in the world.

"There are numerous cases in which offenders have remained unidentified due to the inability or the failure of the crime lab to analyze DNA evidence from a crime victim or a crime scene," the Cook County state's attorney's office told the auditor general, according to the report. "These offenders have not only retained their liberty longer than they would have had the lab worked up the evidence in a timely manner, but have gone on to murder and victimize other people."

The findings come at a time when major backlogs of untested rape kits -- some older than a decade -- were recently exposed in Los Angeles County, prompting promises of reforms. Confronted with a serious DNA backlog 10 years ago, New York City vowed to reduce it and now boasts a six-week turnaround time for rape kits, experts say.

After the state lab's DNA backlog first came to light in 2003, Blagojevich and the General Assembly allocated additional funds for forensics and told the lab to make annual reports on progress in cutting the backlog. In July 2005, Blagojevich, armed with state police crime lab statistics, announced the backlog had been eliminated. Blagojevich spokesman Glenn Selig said Thursday that the governor used numbers provided by an assistant and never intended to present false information. In 2007, the state police lab reported its DNA backlog had resurfaced with 668 cases and a turnaround time of 72 days. But the agency assured the governor and the General Assembly that the backlog would be reduced the following year because of improvements.  

Convinced the workload at the lab appeared under control, a non-profit group that had formed to address the problem disbanded. The group, begun four years earlier, raised private funds to help pay for the testing of hundreds of rape kits that sat untested in storage at the Chicago Police Department.  With that task completed, the Women's DNA Initiative saw no need to continue, said Sheri Mecklenburg, who launched the effort when she served as general counsel to the Chicago police superintendent. "We assumed they could keep up with the current caseload," she said. The General Assembly, which appropriates money to the state crime lab and other state agencies, was also in the dark, said state Rep. Jim Durkin (R-Western Springs). "We were lied to," said Durkin, who sponsored legislation in 2007 calling for the audit of the state crime lab. "To know how to handle this, it's extremely important that they act in a transparent way."

In reality, the state crime lab was not including in its reports information about rape kits and other samples outsourced to private labs that were going untested for more than 30 days. Thousands of cases were outsourced each year, with an average turnaround time that exceeded those tested inside the state crime lab, the audit said. Once the auditor general brought this issue to light in 2008, the agency began reporting both its in-house and outsourced backlog."

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

According to the PR/Newswire:  

Cook County Judge Clayton Crane ruled Wednesday that attorneys for Cortez Brown may begin a process to subpoena former Chicago Police Commander Jon Burge to testify about the beating inflicted on Brown during a 1990 murder investigation. Brown falsely confessed to the crime after Burge's subordinates bludgeoned him with a flashlight and committed other abuses. He continues to languish in state prison due to the wrongful conviction.  Seeking to void that conviction, Locke Bowman, Legal Director of the Roderick MacArthur Justice Center, and Attorney for Cortez Brown sought leave to subpoena Burge and former Detective Tony Maslanka, who currently live out-of-state, as material witnesses. The certification that Burge and Maslanka are material witnesses in the Brown case permits the attorneys to seek a subpoena within the jurisdiction in which Burge and Maslanka live. In 1990, Brown was arrested for the murders of Devin Boelter and Curtis Sims. Brown alleges that Area 3 police detectives John O'Brien, John Paladino and Tony Maslanka - all of whom worked directly under Burge - verbally threatened him and beat him repeatedly with fists and a flashlight until he agreed to submit a bogus confession to the crimes.  At trials for both murders, Brown's coerced confessions were the principal evidence used to tie him to the alleged crimes. And in both cases, the larger pattern of atrocities that Burge inflicted on other black suspects was not revealed. Burge is currently under federal indictment for perjury and obstruction of justice based on his sworn denials that suspects were abused and tortured. Brown finished serving the 30 year sentence imposed on him for one of the murders, but seeks release from his natural life sentence for the second.

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Houston Chronicle is reporting that the prosecutors and defense attorneys will request that Gary Alvin Richard be released on bond next week pending a further investigation. A jury convicted Richard of an attack on a nursing student in 1987 in a trial based largely on bood-type evidence from the Houston Police Department Crime Lab. The Chronicle reports that there were several problems with the conviction including the fact that the victim identified Richard seven months after the crime, there were conflicting conclusions by crime lab analysts, and a rape kit had been destroyed.

Bob Wicoff, Richard's attorney stated that he was troubled by the fact the Rape kit was not preserved:

“The real crime is that another rape kit has been destroyed or discarded,” Wicoff said. “The standards for preserving evidence were less stringent in 1987, but that is no excuse.” Without the rape kit, analysts at a California lab tested Richard’s body fluids and drew conclusions that Wicoff said establish his innocence. “He could not have been the source of the semen at the crime scene,” Wicoff said.

The new evidence derives from saliva samples that were preserved. The Crime Lab representative testified at trial that Richard was non-secretor, meaning his blood type was not shown in the saliva sample. However, upon retesting, it was found that Richard's saliva was secretor, showing his blood type. That blood type did not match the blood type left at the scene. Prosecutors say it is too early to say whether Richard should be cleared of the crime, even though they support his release. The District Attorney in Houston, Pat Lykos, is using Richard's case to call for an independent crime lab separate from the Houston Police Department. Four people have been exonerated due to errors made by the HPD Crime Lab

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The AP is reporting that Alton Logan, who was convicted in 1983 of shooting a security guard at McDonald's, has been issued a certificate of innocence by Chief Judge Paul Biebel Jr. in the Cook County Circuit Court. Logan was convicted by a jury, but two attorneys last year revealed his innocence. A client of theirs had admitted to them that he had committed the crime, however, they could not come forward until that client passed away in 2007. 

                          

 

Alton Logan's case made national headlines last year when attorneys Dale Coventry and Jamie Kunz revealed that Logan was innocent because their client, Andrew Wilson, who they were defending for killing two policemen, confessed to them that he had also killed the security guard at McDonald's - the crime Logan was charged with. Watch Coventry and Kunz explain why they kept this a secret all these years. 

As a result of the revelation of this secret - Logan's attorney Jon Loevy is now considering a lawsuit against the Chicago Police.  

 

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

                 

The newswire is reporting that a documentary called "Witch Hunt" -  a story about the arrest, conviction, and later exoneration of dozens of Bakersfield, California adults for alleged child sex abuse in the mid-1980s - will make its world television premiere April 12 on MSNBC.

According to the press release: 

Witch Hunt weaves the larger Bakersfield story through the travails of John Stoll, a construction worker, who while in the midst of a custody battle over his young son was accused of sexually abusing the boy and five other children. Stoll was convicted and sentenced to 40 years in prison despite glaring problems, among them, a lack of physical evidence, suggestive questioning of the children by authorities, irregularities in the investigation, and overreaching by prosecutors.

Stoll's conviction was ultimately reversed after three Northern California Innocence Project attorneys and 10 Santa Clara University law students proved, after two years and thousands of borrowed dollars, that the methods used to interview the child witnesses produced false testimony.

After witnessing firsthand the dedicated team and vital services provided by the Innocence Project, which has lost the government funding it once received, directors Dana Nachman and Don Hardy decided to donate a portion of the profits from the sale of the DVD to NCIP.

"We learned a little bit about the epidemic of wrongful convictions in this country, where over two million people are incarcerated," said Hardy. "If even one percent of those prisoners are innocent, a very low estimate by most experts, that means more than twenty thousand people are looking toward agencies like the Innocence Project for help. Dana and I want to do our part to help them continue to fight for the rights of the wrongly convicted.

The documentary is narrated by Academy Award(R) winning actor Sean Penn, with music by Pearl Jam (whose lead singer, Eddie Vedder, donated the song after viewing an early version of the film).

 

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

Here is an article by Robert Weisskopf, president of the Chicago Police Lieutenants Association:

Here in the United States of America, citizens have the right to be treated as innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. If there is an allegation of wrongdoing made against an individual and it is not sustained, then the there should be no presumption of guilt. I think this is obvious logic.

However, here in Chicago a federal court recently determined that a list of Chicago Police Department officers with five or more charges of excessive force must be released to an attorney. This list is being referred to as a list of officers guilty of excessive force.

Most of the allegations made against the officers on the list have not been sustained. As a matter of fact, very few of these allegations have even been sustained. All of these allegations have been investigated either by the former Office of Professional Standards or the new Independent Police Review Authority.

Here is the way it works: A hard-working police officer makes arrests. Many make 200 or more arrests a year. That is not uncommon. Unfortunately not all arrestees say, "Thank you, Officer. No hard feelings." To try to get a little vengeance against an officer, they file a complaint. I have heard that it is not uncommon for a defense attorney to recommend that a client immediately file an accusation of excessive force against the arresting officer to try to muddy the waters and help the case.

The Independent Police Review Authority is required to investigate any and all complaints of excessive force regardless of how outlandish and outrageous the complaints may be. It does its best to thoroughly investigate these allegations. It is not trying to cover up any wrongdoing. In the end the evidence only supports a sustained finding on a small fraction of these complaints.

Every good, hard-working police officer I have ever met has had allegations made against him or her. That is the life of a cop.

As president of the Chicago Police Lieutenants Association, it is my responsibility to help provide for the common welfare of Chicago Police lieutenants and the support of all measures for the protection and benefit of the public good. I fail to see any public good as the result of this court's action. In spite of this court's failure to support the guardians of their society, officers of the Chicago Police Department will leave the safety of their homes and show up for work today and tomorrow and as long as needed and step out to provide the service our city needs.

Police officers have long been held to a higher standard as well they should.

However, they should have the rights and protections that anyone else enjoys.

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

                    

Click here to see the full 60 minutes 

CBS 60 Minutes correspondent Lesley Stahl provided an in-depth analysis on the flaws of eyewitness identification. Stahl tells the compelling story of a rape victim named Jennifer Thompson. She picked Ronald Cotton out of a photo array and Cotton was arrested. After she picked him out of a lineup, Cotton was put on trial and convicted. While in prison, Cotton ran into a man named Bobby Poole and they looked a lot alike. In fact, the prisoners and guards would even mistakenly call each other by the other name. Eventually, Cotton was exonerated by DNA evidence, and it was shown that Poole committed the crime.

The story goes on analyze some issues involved with the identification. First, Stahl reports that it is often the case that the real perpetrator is not in the photo array.

"When you're sittin' in front of a photo lineup, you just assume one of these guys is the suspect. It's my job to find it," Thompson explained.
"Bobby Poole's photograph was not in the photo lineup," Thompson told Stahl. "He was not in the physical lineup."

"When the real perpetrator is not in the set, is none of them, witnesses have a very difficult time being able to recognize that," explained Gary Wells, a professor of psychology at Iowa State University.

Wells goes on to state that eyewitness ID's are very persuasive because the victim has no reason to lie. However he says, that if a person sees someone that did the crime, it would trigger recognition memory.

"Recognition memory is actually quite rapid. So we find in our studies, for example, that if somebody's taking longer than ten, 15 seconds, it's quite likely that they're doing something other than just using reliable recognition memory."

Wells continues and states that the biggest issue is the reinforcement factor after an identification. After the choice, the detective or officer familiar with the case and the victim often say good job or you made the right choice. This makes the victim feel they did it right, and become more positive about their choice.

[Wells] says the solution is to have someone independent administer the lineup, someone who doesn't even know who the suspect is. And certainly not the detective on the case.

Don't be quick to discount eyewitness identification - it has been the most prominent and valuable tool in putting away criminals. While there are cases such as this one, which are heart-wrenching, the police officer was doing his job by the book. Yet, in many cases such as this, the wrongly convicted still goes after the officer and the police department for civil liability. In a case like this, that lawsuit would be inappropriate and frivolous (but it still happens everyday). It is important to note that Cotton did not sue the police department and received 10,000/year for each of the 11 years from the state of North Carolina.

 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

CBS in Dallas is reporting:  

North Texans and people around the world have become accustomed to seeing inmates, wrongly convicted of a crime in Dallas County, released because of DNA evidence. Now the table has been turned on one man who claimed to be innocent of his crimes. Charles Williams is a rapist and a liar. His DNA proves it. For the past two years, Dallas County men, with decades of prison time served, have been cleared of crimes they didn't commit. The science of DNA proved it. Williams told The Innocence Project he too was wrongly convicted of raping a woman in 1988. "In talking to Charles, I mean he even today will tell you that he did not commit this crime," said public defender Michelle Moore. "But you have to be careful what you ask for here." Williams had the Dallas District Attorney's Office investigate his innocence claim. In the beginning, his case looked like so many of the others. Williams was convicted based on eyewitness testimony and even pled guilty to two other sexual assaults, but maintained his innocence.

Here is the kicker:

District Attorney Craig Watkins wants Williams to spend more time in prison. The convicted rapists' DNA points to Williams as the attacker and only him. "When we believe there's a valid claim of innocence, we have a responsibility to investigate that," explained Watkins. "We did in this case, and unfortunately in this case, the defendant was less than truthful and he will stay in jail as long as we have a say so over it." Williams' victim said the man should have time added to his sentence for wasting taxpayers' money... and that's the plan.

 Watch the DA's comments here

This is not a surprise .  We have seen cases where even when DNA does not match - the person was still involved in the crime.   In one case we saw that just because the man did not rape a little girl (i.e. semen inside the girl was a negative match), did not mean he was not involved in the initial kidnap of the girl.   

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

An article in The Huffington Post authored by Ginny Sloan (President and Founder of the Constitution Project) and Jon Gould (Assoc. Professor and Director, Center for Justice, Law & Society at George Mason University) discussed the economic need for reform in the area of wrongful convictions. The article calls for all states to invest now in criminal justice reforms in order to avoid "enormous human and financial costs later."  According to the article:

Wrongful convictions are tragic for all involved, and they are expensive. Taxpayers pay for police investigations and criminal prosecutions that ensnare the wrong person. They pay the costs of incarcerating that person, and they may face substantial damages in wrongful conviction civil suits. All the while, the actual perpetrator is still on the street, able to prey on others.

But the reforms needed to prevent wrongful convictions may not be expensive. These reforms may not only prevent wrongful convictions and the terrible costs to all involved, but they may also prevent the taxpayers from incurring needless costs.

The authors discuss certain changes that could be made to prevent wrongful convictions, which in effect, would lower the economic impact. The authors assert that police need to make several reforms including increasing the accuracy of suspect identification by changing line-up procedures, videotaping interrogations. The authors also suggest that "police officers should be trained to consider a wide net of potential suspects before honing in on the most likely perpet

rator." They also call for prosecutor's to open up case files to defense attorneys and allowing judges to hear post-conviction claims of innocence. Finally, the authors discuss the ever-present public defender issue.

The suggestions made by the authors are on point, even though they underestimate the breadth of the problem. One major economic effect of wrongful convictions is that most states allow double recovery in compensation.  Most of the states that do provide means of compensation for time spent wrongfully incarcerated still allow the released person to sue the municipality and individual police officers.   The Innocence Project maintains a list of the states that provide such compensation.  See for yourself.   

Tort reform is needed in this area.  People feel for the wrongfully incarcerated and want to blame someone.  Almost always its the police.  The focus needs to be on solving the problems - not a constant attack on the police.  Every lawsuit merely fuels the next, which adds to the percise economic problems Ginny Sloan addresses. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks