a very serious need for prosecutorial oversight

http://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2012-04-06/panel-emphasizes-need-for-prosecutorial-oversight/

Although courts have confirmed that prosecutorial misconduct occurred in 91 Texas criminal cases between 2004 and 2008, not a single prosecutor among those has ever been disciplined for their misbehavior, according to new data compiled by the Innocence Proj*ect. (Allegations of prosecutor misconduct were raised in another 124 cases, but those issues were not ruled on by any court.)

This is likely just the tip of the iceberg, said Emily West, IP research director, during a public dialogue on prosecutorial oversight last week at the University of Texas School of Law. Indeed, because 98% of Texas criminal cases are resolved through plea bargain, it is unlikely that we'll ever know the true extent of the problem – which includes withholding exculpatory or other evidence possibly favorable to a defendant. Of the 91 cases in which the courts agreed there was misconduct, 36 involved "improper" arguments during trial, 35 involved improper questioning of a witness, and eight involved a failure to disclose favorable materials, known as a Brady violation. That's exactly what Michael Morton says happened to him.

Exonerated last year, Morton spent nearly 25 years in prison for the bludgeoning death of his wife before DNA evidence linked another man to the crime instead. Morton's conviction could have been avoided, he argues, had Williamson County prosecutors – chief among them former District Attorney Ken Ander*son, who is now a district judge – had turned over evidence they had back in 1986 that suggested strongly that Morton was innocent of the crime. Anderson is now facing a rare "court of inquiry" (slated to begin Sept. 11), in which a court will determine if his actions (or inactions) violated criminal statutes. (If so, perhaps the IP will have to add a single hash mark to the "disciplined prosecutor" column.)
 
i agree STY. the virtual unlimited freedom given to prosecutors.....is atrocious.

absolute immunity needs to be overhauled...........big time.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/14/n...-prosecutorial-misconduct-in-queens.html?_r=1

In March 2000, a tough guy named Petros Bedi was convicted of shooting a man dead in an Astoria nightclub. For this and other crimes, he is now serving 42 1/2 years in prison.

The crucial witness against Mr. Bedi agreed to testify only after the police arrested him on charges of dealing drugs.

During Mr. Bedi’s trial, a defense lawyer blasted away at the credibility of this witness and tried to prove he had incentive to lie. Didn’t the Queens district attorney foot the hotel bill to put up you and your girlfriend for eight months? Weren’t you paid handsomely for your testimony?

No, the witness insisted. I paid my own bill. Nobody paid me anything.

This was not true, and the prosecutors who sat in that courtroom and vouched for the honesty and truthfulness of this witness knew it.

Newly disclosed witness protection records show that the district attorney’s office in fact paid the witness, Seraphim Koumpouras, $16,640 for hotel bills. Prosecutors also gave him about $3,000 in cash; he received the last payment six days before he testified.

None of these specifics were disclosed to the defense. Instead, Mr. Bedi, with the help of a private investigator, battled for 10 years to obtain these records, which prosecutors should have turned over at the trial.

In a lawsuit filed Monday in State Supreme Court in Queens, Mr. Bedi’s new lawyer, Joel Rudin, asked the court to overturn the conviction. “This is,” he said, “a reprehensible case of prosecutorial misconduct.”

The district attorney’s office says only that it intends to contest the case vigorously.

In 2003, a court found that a prosecutor in Queens had lied and tolerated lies by witnesses in order to convict Shih-Wei Su of a pool-hall murder.

Mr. Su served 13 years in prison. When he got out, he sued the city with Mr. Rudin’s help. In 2008, the city agreed, by way of apology, to write him a check for $3.5 million.

Mr. Rudin also handled the case of Jabbar Collins, who served 16 years because of prosecutorial missteps in Brooklyn. With Mr. Rudin’s help, he filed suit last year against the city and Michael Vecchione, chief of the rackets bureau for Brooklyn’s district attorney.

Prosecutorial misconduct has become a legal sore in plain sight. Marvin Schechter, a defense lawyer and chairman of the criminal justice section of the New York State Bar Association, wrote a column recently stating that misconduct stood revealed not as a trickle but as a polluted river.

He blamed district attorneys who valued conviction rates and tough-guy images over adherence to the rights of the accused. “Assistant district attorneys do not emerge from law school with a genetic disposition” to hide vital material, he wrote. “Instead this is something which is learned and taught.”

Prosecutors loosened howls of indignation. Prominent prosecutorial sorts have written letters in the past month and intimated they will no longer serve on committees if such calumnies stand.

70 known cases of prosecutorial mistakes and misbehavior in Queens over about a decade, the district attorney, Richard A. Brown, has disciplined just one lawyer.

In Brooklyn, the district attorney, Charles J. Hynes, promoted and gave an award to Mr. Vecchione.

Three years ago, the State Bar Association created a task force that studied 53 cases of wrongful conviction. It found that prosecutorial and police misconduct accounted for over half the cases.
 
big shock that you don't understand how the process works to discipline prosecutorial misconduct. maybe the below link will guide you in the right direction.

http://legalethicsforum.typepad.com/blog/2008/11/prosecutors-see.html
Not really that helpful.


Prosecutorial misconduct is when prosecutors are bad, when they introduce evidence that has been excluded by a judge or in some other ways break the rules. Generally results in a trial being thrown out when it is discovered, or a mistrial, which is not the same thing. Same answer, They're employed by the district's attorney, he's the one who's supposed to be keeping them in line. Unless of course they're federal or state employees.

Not sure what you think is supposed to be done here. When it's found out they lose the trial and possibly lose their licence to practice law. Pretty convinced this is just another STY "Gubberment is evil" thread.
 
Not really that helpful.


Prosecutorial misconduct is when prosecutors are bad, when they introduce evidence that has been excluded by a judge or in some other ways break the rules.
really? you mean things like withhold evidence? or suborn perjury? which is the main issue in the cases that i've presented, btw. but you don't think those things are bad? just violating a judges orders?

maybe you should educate yourself a little better.

read these below...

http://www.theagitator.com/2012/08/08/what-absolute-immunity-actually-means/

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-06-13/innocent-incarcerated-prisoners/55585176/1


Generally results in a trial being thrown out when it is discovered, or a mistrial, which is not the same thing. Same answer, They're employed by the district's attorney, he's the one who's supposed to be keeping them in line. Unless of course they're federal or state employees.
and when that DA doesn't?

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/07/03/opinion/sunday/20110703_Editorial_Annotation.html

Not sure what you think is supposed to be done here. When it's found out they lose the trial and possibly lose their licence to practice law. Pretty convinced this is just another STY "Gubberment is evil" thread.
that is what SHOULD be done, but it so rarely is even in the face of misconduct, or are you not able to comprehend that in the articles that i've posted in this thread?
 
What are you gonna do about it, SmarterThanFew?

Your usual - nothing.
 
Back
Top