Posted on 04/10/2011 9:24:30 AM PDT by KantianBurke
I SPENT 18 years in prison for robbery and murder, 14 of them on death row. I’ve been free since 2003, exonerated after evidence covered up by prosecutors surfaced just weeks before my execution date. Those prosecutors were never punished. Last month, the Supreme Court decided 5-4 to overturn a case I’d won against them and the district attorney who oversaw my case, ruling that they were not liable for the failure to turn over that evidence — which included proof that blood at the robbery scene wasn’t mine.
Because of that, prosecutors are free to do the same thing to someone else today.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
That’s a simple restatement of the Niphong doctrine.
Abuse of power is one of the worst crimes that people can commit in a free society. Police and prosecutors who hide evidence because it might interfere with their case are guilty of a crime and deserve to be punished severely.
The goal of our judicial system should be justice, not convictions at all cost.
They would, or at least they could be if the state AG wanted to pursue that kind of case. But, that's not what this case is about. This is about immunity in civil court, not criminal court.
Prosecutors, if they suborn perjury or obstruct justice through the destruction or hiding of evidence, can be - and have been - prosecuted and even jailed. At a minimum, they'll lose their license to practice law.
This particular case, however, had a slightly different set of facts and matters of law that are being portrayed in this story. Simply, the Court was asked to decide -
Can a prosecutor's office be held liable for the illegal conduct of one of its prosecutors, on the theory that the office failed to adequately train its employees, when there has been only one violation resulting from that deficient training?
And, the Court said "no".
No. A divided Supreme Court held that a prosecutor's office could not be held liable for the illegal conduct of one of its prosecutors when there has been only one violation resulting from that deficient training. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion for the court. In a dissent read from the bench, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, joined by Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, argued that the "what happened here, the Court's opinion obscures, was no momentary oversight, no single incident of a lone officer's misconduct." Instead, Ginsburg contended, evidence "established persistent, deliberately indifferent conduct for which the District Attorney's Office bears responsibility under §1983."
I think the Court got this particular case right.
Malpractice was present if intent wasn’t ....
I have bad thoughts on what I would do to anyone that did such to me intentionally or not. Time can’t be recovered....
Prime excuse for don’t get mad just get even.
Btw...was this a civil or criminal case against the prosecutors etc ?
Stay Safe....
Under the Law of Moses, those who conspired to convict an innocent person were punished as he would have been if found guilty.
Decent deterrent, considering the large number of capital crimes under the Law.
No one in government can be held liable. That why it attracts so many low lifes.
The movie “Conviction”.
Prosecutors and police who pull this crap should do no less time than the people they railroad.
“They would, or at least they could be if the state AG wanted to pursue that kind of case. But, that’s not what this case is about.”
I agree. My comments was geared towards prosecuting those that lie under oath or hide evidence.
Being ignorant of the democrat machine politics can scew you're idea of "justice"..
And the democrats "RAN" the south for many decades..
America would be a better place without the democrat party..
IF the republican party is not "cleaned UP" the same is true of them..
Washington D.C. and the federal government generally is a barrel of spoiled apples..
Cleaning it up will/would take herculean effort by the TpCaucus.. "IF" can be done at all..
They hold the power and use it to defend one another.
Keep fighting.
Oh Heavenly Father, why do you allow people to go through such torment? Please understand that Your time and human time are so very different and speed things up. I know of so many undeserving who are being tormented right now. How would it hurt if their times of torment were straightened out a lot sooner? Heavenly Father hear our prayer. It is asked in the Name of Your Son Jesus Christ.
Exactly why we still have an illegal usurper in office.
Horrifying the power the state has and how they exercise it.
Is anyone else in favor of a MANDATORY sentence of decades (not years) for any individual that takes an oath of office such as law enforcement, judges, prosecutors, elected officials, etc that are found guilty of corruption or misusing their position.
The sentence needs to be 1 offense and mandatory because judges and officials tend to take special care of their own. That’s not to say they wouldn’t cover-up the prosecution, but they’d be placing themselves at big risk.
The citizens also need a way around the current system that demands that we depend upon lawmakers to make all laws. We need a referendum capability that can be initiated by the people and passed by the people without requiring approval of the political institution.
Just a thought.
Conviction was a good movie.
As a defense attorney it chills me to the bone when I get an innocent client. I lay awake at night thinking about those cases.
Sadly I’m getting to where I would just rather have all guilty clients.
True, there are no police for the police, no prosecutors for prosecutors, no judges for judges. The fourth estate used to exert some checks on abuse by the protected power class, but no more.
Because of that, prosecutors are free to do the same thing to someone else today.
I'm corn-fused??????
To wit:
'Color of Law' (1)Now it seems pretty clear that Mr Thompson's Civil Rights were violated. The only thing is that he has to get Eric Holder and his DOJ to go after the Rogue Prosecutor. Which to me would appear to be a no brainer ...uh ...wait?
An action done under the Color Of Law is one done with the apparent authority of law, but actually in contravention of law.A federal cause of action may be maintained against a State Officer who under "color of law" deprives a person of their civil rights. [42 U.S.C. § 1983]
What color is Mr Thompson?
[Not Sarcasm!]
(1) 'Law Dictionary' Fourth Edition, by Steven H. Gifis
Associate Professor of Law, Rutgers Univ.
© Barron's 1996
I disagree with you on this. We grant prosecutors and the police the power over individual life and liberty, and as such, I believe that they should actually be held to a higher standard of behavior and performance. When they purposely withhold or falsify evidence, the criminal punishment should be substantially greater than what a "civilian" would receive in a similar situation.
I am of the belief that in a case like this, those involved in the cover up should be found guilty of both the crime they committed AND have the sentence increased by whatever sentence was imposed on the falsely imprisoned man. And had the falsely imprisoned man be put to death, the same should follow for those involved with the cover up.
Mark
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.