Do you think wrongful convictions never happen?  Think again!  Although we don't have any reliable statistics, we know it happens a lot.  Some lawyers estimate as many as 20% of trial convictions are in error - because innocent defendants are more likely to resist taking a plea bargain and insist on going to trial.  The problem is, the system is inherently skewed against the defendant and most jurors are not sophisticated or motivated enough to look at the "evidence" versus other noise in the trial or the media.

Shows such as "CSI" and "Law and Order" are incredibly popular today.  Audiences are wowed by the high tech gadgetry they see on TV and the dynamic "Lawyering" that entertains them.  However, this does not reflect the reality of a real-world courtroom.  In some cases today, DNA testing is able to set wrongfully convicted defendants free, but unfortunately, those are the minority of the wrongfully convicted. No DNA testing, no DNA evidence will ever set Michelle Theer free.  No DNA testing was ever done, but even if it had been, what would it prove?  The State conceded at the beginning of her trial that Michelle Theer did not shoot her husband.

Some wrongful convictions occur because police & prosecutors are more interested in convicting someone, than convicting the right person.

 

 

http://justicedenied.org

 

"Essential reading for anyone interested in the how and why the State can and does wrongfully convict the innocent in America.  Provides powerful analyses and gripping case histories of injustice run amok in the American criminal justice system.  The miscarriages of justice routinely documented by Justice Denied should not be happening in America and needs to be stopped."

                                                                                                        

Richard A. Leo                                                                                                                                                                                 Associate Professor of Law, University of San Francisco

 

 

http://www.reason.com

 

     Finally, a prosecutor who is willing to speak out about the aggressive attitude and win-at-all-costs approach that has caused many innocent people to be convicted!  In an interview with Reason Magazine, Craig Watkins explains how he established a "Conviction Integrity Unit" at the Dallas County D.A. office where he was elected.  This D.A. takes his oath to "seek justice" seriously, and that includes "to make sure innocent folks aren't convicted."

     When he took office, Dallas County was known for its convict-at-all-costs tactics.  Watkins fired 9 prosecutors and 9 left voluntarily.  According to him, "it was a badge of honor at the time - to knowingly convict someone that wasn't guilty."  How many other DA's around the country consider this a badge of honor and have the same attitude?  Certainly there is nothing unique about Dallas County.  His Integrity Unit looks at old cases for bad convictions, but also evaluates procedures to prevent them from happening in the future.  Why doesn't every D.A.'s office around the country have an "Integrity Unit?"

     Unfortunately, he claims to be experiencing criticism for seeking out and freeing the wrongfully convicted.  However, he is adamant that "we aren't here to rack up convictions.  We're here to seek justice."  Watkins believes that people are only interested in the number of convictions.  Prosecutors are therefore motivated by numbers, headlines and appearing to get tough on crime.

     In the process, he says, "we've stripped away protections for the accused, and as a result, I think many prosecutors went into a case with blinders on - like everyone was guilty.  We are now seeing the fallout from that mentality."  Scores of defendants on death row now have been exonerated in recent years by DNA evidence and many more are expected as testing continues.  Watkins goes on to discuss the problems with faulty eye-witness identification and new police methods and procedures that should be followed in order to give defendants the fairest possible trial.

     He also points out that prosecutors should be cautious about the cases the police recommend to them and assuming guilt in every instance.  "We need to guard against being a rubber stamp for every case the police sends our way.  We need to be more skeptical."

     Another important step in the legal process, Watkins point out, is for the Appellate Courts to start being more assertive in reviewing a defendants case.  "Appellate Courts are often reluctant to second-guess a jury.  They need to be willing to open their minds."  He discusses the fact that Appellate Courts don't review actual evidence, but only procedural issues, as being highly problematic.  "I think the mere fact that we've had so many exonerations ought to move them to take a closer look at the evidence in criminal cases."

     Bravo to Watkins for standing up for true justice and speaking out against unethical prosecutors.  To read his interview with Reason Magazine, go to:  http://www.reason.com/news/show/125596.html

 

 

 

http://www.famm.org

 

"Families Against Mandatory Minimums is the national voice for fair and proportionate sentencing laws. We shine a light on the human face of sentencing, advocate for state and federal sentencing reform, and mobilize thousands of individuals and families whose lives are adversely affected by unjust sentences."