TexasCHLforum.com

I guess I must just be naive. I can not for the life of me understand the satisfaction one would receive from intentionally withholding evidence to convict an innocent person of a crime. All of the people in a position of authority who were involved with this should be locked up for the remainder of their lives!

http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/08/justice/n ... onviction/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The results of a justice system not interested in justice.

I am surprised the jury believed that one witness. I wonder if the defense is allowed to bring up the woman's own arrest and deal. That would have colored her testimony. It is a lesson for us about witness testimony. The receipt is another matter.

It also points to something that stinks in that prosecutors office. They really had no evidence tying this man to the killing, but prosecuted him anyway and convinced a rather gullible jury.

That is reprehensible.

Eye witness testimony is notoriously unreliable, but unless people are educated about that fact people tend to believe what others say.

Carzan wrote:I guess I must just be naive. I can not for the life of me understand the satisfaction one would receive from intentionally withholding evidence to convict an innocent person of a crime. All of the people in a position of authority who were involved with this should be locked up for the remainder of their lives!

http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/08/justice/n ... onviction/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I am not in any way condoning this but one possible explanation COULD be that the guy was a known "bad actor" (maybe had a long rap sheet?) and those involved saw this as a way to take a proven bad guy off the street... I've seen 1980's NYPD "justice" first hand, and would not dismiss this possibility.

Please note that this is both entirely fabricated guesswork and, if true, entirely unacceptable behavior.

The police hid evidence (receipt) that proved the defendant was innocent. They later lied when asked specifically if the receipt (evidence) existed. The police brought a newly arrested parolee to the DA's office where she was offered a get-out-of-jail-free card if she perjured herself by testifying under oath that she saw the innocent defendant shoot the victim. Apparently, the information about the secret meeting and deal was not provided to defense counsel. When she later recanted and probably stated why she lied in the first place, the judge ignored this critical evidence from and about the sole witness against the innocent man.

This was not a mistake; it was a conspiracy between police officers and an assistant DA to convict an innocent man. It's been 25 years so the statute of limitations on any criminal offenses has run and none of the people involved can be tried. An innocent man spent a quarter century in prison and the people who conspired to put him there will never see the inside of a courtroom. The statute of limitations on such crimes should not begin to run until the defendant has been shown to be innocent, or when evidence of police or prosecutorial misconduct finally surfaces. Sadly, it wouldn't make any difference. Police and prosecutorial misconduct has been proven numerous times around the country including here in Houston and Dallas, yet not a single person has been prosecuted. The feds aren't even stepping in and filing §1983 criminal charges. Look at the stats linked at the bottom of the OP's article. They just apply to cases where DNA is available. Since misconduct isn't limited to cases where DNA is present, there's every reason to believe that the number of convictions of innocent people is much higher than I would have ever imagined 20 years ago.

Lest anyone think I'm a "bleeding heart liberal," I've been a conservative, death penalty-supporting Republican all my life. I was a police officer for 10 years. Revelations in recent years (many from private videos or DNA evidence) have shaken my faith in our judicial system. It's bad enough to have dishonest LEOs and prosecutors, but the fact that they are rarely if ever prosecuted is devastating to our system of justice.

Chas.

Charles,
You are just getting cynical. The system always works out in the favor of justice. That's why so many that work for the system thinks it's ok to just arrest someone and let the DA's, grand juries, judges and juries work it out. [sarcasm off]

I too am concerned where we are headed in a bad direction as it appears there are more and more instances of such cases being uncovered. When there is no accountability for those with authority and power, human nature predisposes people to do bad things and justify it as however necessary. Plus I think the system is set up to reward DA's to get a conviction rather than to try to get to justice.

Just a couple of my thoughts. I'm sure others will disagree.

I agree with Charles!

This a question for any lawyers, Charles included. I am curious if this would have even come to light in Texas. The criminal appeals process in Texas is difficult and seems to be skewed against complaints by those convicted (IMHO). Putting that aside my question is this, assuming this information becomes known 20-25 years later and an attorney tries to get into the appeals process. Would the court throw it out because the deadline to file has passed? There have been cases where exonerating facts and information simply wouldn't be allowed to be presented because the deadline for appeal has passed. Even if he could prove misconduct would that have to occur prior to filing an appeal or would it be part of the process? I would think that would be difficult since police and prosecutors would deny any misconduct and say it was misplaced, lost, etc. Would the evidence simply be ignored by the appellate court since the deadline has passed?

No need to go to NY for this type of reprehensible behavior.

Good old Williamson county justice is no better.

Michael Morton spent 25 years in jail under similar circumstances.

Texas Senate Bill 1611 because effective Jan 1 because of this.

Ken Anderson served 5 days in jail and will be able to reapply for his law license in 5 years.

There is no such thing as justice.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:The police hid evidence (receipt) that proved the defendant was innocent. They later lied when asked specifically if the receipt (evidence) existed. The police brought a newly arrested parolee to the DA's office where she was offered a get-out-of-jail-free card if she perjured herself by testifying under oath that she saw the innocent defendant shoot the victim. Apparently, the information about the secret meeting and deal was not provided to defense counsel. When she later recanted and probably stated why she lied in the first place, the judge ignored this critical evidence from and about the sole witness against the innocent man.

This was not a mistake; it was a conspiracy between police officers and an assistant DA to convict an innocent man. It's been 25 years so the statute of limitations on any criminal offenses has run and none of the people involved can be tried. An innocent man spent a quarter century in prison and the people who conspired to put him there will never see the inside of a courtroom. The statute of limitations on such crimes should not begin to run until the defendant has been shown to be innocent, or when evidence of police or prosecutorial misconduct finally surfaces. Sadly, it wouldn't make any difference. Police and prosecutorial misconduct has been proven numerous times around the country including here in Houston and Dallas, yet not a single person has been prosecuted. The feds aren't even stepping in and filing §1983 criminal charges. Look at the stats linked at the bottom of the OP's article. They just apply to cases where DNA is available. Since misconduct isn't limited to cases where DNA is present, there's every reason to believe that the number of convictions of innocent people is much higher than I would have ever imagined 20 years ago.

Lest anyone think I'm a "bleeding heart liberal," I've been a conservative, death penalty-supporting Republican all my life. I was a police officer for 10 years. Revelations in recent years (many from private videos or DNA evidence) have shaken my faith in our judicial system. It's bad enough to have dishonest LEOs and prosecutors, but the fact that they are rarely if ever prosecuted is devastating to our system of justice.

Chas.

As a former LEO I have also seen police officers that should have been prosecuted and weren't. It really ticks me off. I cannot stand a thief and a liar. If one did that to me, I cannot say how vehement my reaction would be.

android wrote: There is no such thing as justice.

Well, there is. But don't look to the politariat posing as a justice system to find it. But one day, these monsters will answer for what they have done.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Lest anyone think I'm a "bleeding heart liberal," I've been a conservative, death penalty-supporting Republican all my life. I was a police officer for 10 years. Revelations in recent years (many from private videos or DNA evidence) have shaken my faith in our judicial system. It's bad enough to have dishonest LEOs and prosecutors, but the fact that they are rarely if ever prosecuted is devastating to our system of justice.

Chas.

Charles,
You need to wait, once the police spokesman makes a statement we will know what really happened.