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

 The Chicago Tribune reports today that Judge Dianne Cannon has ruled that more than 500 emails between former Northwestern University journalism professor David Protess and his students detailing their efforts to free prisoner Anthony McKinney must be turned over to prosecutors. Judge Cannon held that the students were "acting as investigators in a criminal proceeding" and further stated that "In this case, the Medill students worked at the direction of Anthony McKinney's attorneys, conducting interviews, gathering evidence" and that "while a book may be written or an article published. . . the information is subject to the rules of discovery." We here on the defense side of these police cases have long opined that NU's law students act as investigators, not journalists. Judge Cannon agreed. Will be interesting to see where things go from here. . .  Stay tuned.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I was always under the impression that Medill's goal was to see that the "innocent" Anthony McKinney should go free.  If Medill truly believed that McKinney is innocent and is sitting in prison unjustly, wouldn't those professors and students do everything and anything to get him out. In 2009, there was simple request for all of Medill's work on the case.  Turning over the information would expedite McKinney's post-conviction hearing.  Instead of turning it over, David Protess has been fighting the subpoenas and working very hard to prevent anyone from seeing exactly what goes on behind the scenes at Medill. Why? Are they hiding something?  Northwestern's latest investigation seems to suggest that they are.    

Could it be that the documents they are hiding don't support McKinney's claim of innocence? hmm...

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

The Chicago Tribune is reporting that David Protess, "whose Medill Innocence Project has been the pride of the prestigious journalism school" - has been asked to stop teaching classes in light of the misconduct that has occurred in the Anthony McKinney case.  As the Tribune explained: "At the center of the dispute are memos written by students during their investigation of the McKinney prosecution —documents Protess turned over to McKinney's lawyers at Northwestern Law School's Center on Wrongful Convictions so they could try to win his freedom. Led by Protess to believe that only limited information had been shared, university officials said, they spent almost a year and hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal expenses fighting prosecutors' bid for all the student records. But now Northwestern officials question whether Protess was forthcoming about what he turned over to McKinney's lawyers. That information was crucial because those materials should also have been given to prosecutors. In addition, a private lawyer hired by Northwestern to lead the court fight with prosecutors abruptly quit representing Protess in the matter last fall, accusing the professor of giving him inaccurate information about what student records had been turned over to McKinney's lawyers, according to documents recently obtained by the Tribune."

Finally, Northwestern was straight with Protess:  "We believe that you have displayed a lack of candor with us and have not cooperated with us," lawyer Richard O'Brien wrote Protess shortly before he withdrew from representing him, according to a copy of the e-mail. 

We need more candor from Protess about what happened in McKinney's case and what exactly is happening at Medill.  Northwestern's actions at this point are good, but long overdue.  In October and November of 2009, when the story broke, I called for Northwestern to take the State's Attorney's allegations seriously and work to clear the name of Medill and its students. Nothing happened.  I was then invited by WNUR (Northwestern's Radio Station) in December 2009  to a panel discussion with Northwestern professors, where I told them in person that the university should be investigating these allegations.  The professors dismissed my call for an investigation and were adamant that Protess should fight the subpoenas. A year later, its pretty clear that Protess is still hiding things and he is now being told to step down because of his actions.

Keep up the pressure Northwestern - this will only help the integrity of the university.    

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

 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
• Share Link

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
• Share Link

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
• Share Link

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
• Share Link

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
• Share Link