Sometimes our legal system manages to go after rich and powerful wrongdoers.  Unfortunately, this seems to require horrific crimes and years of waiting.  This is the story of Stephen Flatow, a man who was determined to wring some justice out of the system.

A Grieving Father Pulls a Thread That Unravels Illegal Bank Deals

By JESSICA SILVER-GREENBERG and BEN PROTESS

New York Times

June 30, 2014 

Stephen Flatow of West Orange, N.J., accused Iran of financing the terrorist group responsible for the suicide bombing that killed his daughter, Alisa, in 1995.

A bus bombing two decades ago — and a New Jersey father’s quest for justice — inadvertently set off a chain of events that led American prosecutors to accuse some of the world’s biggest banks of transferring money for nations like Iran.

On Monday, that crackdown culminated with the guilty plea of BNP Paribas, which admitted to doing billions of dollars in deals with Iran and other countries blacklisted by the United States and agreed to pay a record $8.9 billion penalty to state and federal authorities.

The trail that ultimately led to BNP began in 2006, when the Manhattan district attorney’s office came upon a lawsuit filed by the father, who blamed Iran for financing the Gaza bus bombing that killed his 20-year-old daughter. Buried in the court filings, prosecutors found a stunning accusation: a charity that owned a gleaming office tower on Fifth Avenue was actually a “front” for the Iranian government, a claim that the prosecutors ultimately verified.

The prosecutors soon discovered that Credit Suisse and Lloyds, two of the world’s most prestigious banks, had acted as Iran’s portal to the United States financial system. To disguise the illicit transactions — the United States is closed for business to Iran — Credit Suisse and Lloyds stripped out the Iranian clients’ names from wire transfers to the Fifth Avenue charity and affiliated entities. The findings led the Manhattan prosecutors and the Justice Department in Washington to announce criminal cases against both banks.

As those cases were coming to light in 2009, a whistle-blower stepped forward to point the finger at BNP, France’s biggest bank. That tip has now materialized in a landmark criminal settlement, with BNP pleading guilty to criminal charges, capping a sweeping investigation into how the bank processed billions of dollars on behalf of Sudan and Iran.

The twists and turns leading to the BNP case — a series of whistle-blower tips and fortuitous discoveries recounted in interviews with current and former prosecutors — open a window into the interconnected yet shadowy world of global finance...

Teacher who had sex with 14-year-old who later killed herself gets 31 days in jail while taxpayers pay $91,000

Does this look like the face of a person with the sexual sophistication of a fourteen-year-old? This teacher, and the judge in his case, apparently agreed that since 14-year-old girl had already had sex, the teacher wouldn't be causing any more harm by getting a piece of the action. Others think the teacher took advantage of a disturbed child who ended up killing herself. I wonder if he could have made a difference if he had involved himself in her life in a more positive way.

UPDATE Sept. 6, 2013: Judge not allowed to change 30-day sentence

UPDATE: New opinion piece by Meteor Blades

Unfit judge rules rape victim who killed herself 'was as much in control of the situation' as rapist
by Meteor Blades
Daily Kos
Aug 28, 2013

Outrage is growing against a Billings, Montana, judge who handed down a 30-day sentence to a rapist teacher and said the victim, who had killed herself, "was as much in control of the situation" as the teacher—35 years her senior at the time—because she was “older than her chronological age.” Prosecutors had sought a 20-year sentence in the case, with 10 years suspended. District Judge G. Todd Baugh imposed a 15-year sentence and suspended all but 31 days of it, with one day credited for time already served. The judge noted that the crime "did not warrant a lengthy sentence."

Whatever other rulings the 66-year-old Baugh has made during his time on the bench, that one makes him unfit to serve a single day longer.

The outrage began when the girl's mother, Auliea Hanlon, upon hearing the judge's ruling, stormed out of the courtroom repeatedly screaming "You people suck!" She had testified that the sexual relationship between her 14-year-old daughter and high school teacher Stacey Dean Rambold, then 49, had been a major factor in the girl's suicide a few weeks before her 17th birthday. Talk of the case on the internet and coverage in various traditional media have multiplied Hanlon's outrage far and wide.

Organizers plan a rally and protest for Thursday in a park next to the Yellowstone County Courthouse against District Judge G. Todd Baugh. A petition seeking his removal from the bench has been post online.

The case began in 2008 when Stacey Rambold, now 54, a high school teacher who four years earlier had been warned not to touch or be alone with female students, was discovered to be having a relationship with Cherice Morales, a 14-year-old student. He was arrested and initially pleaded guilty to a single felony charge. He was placed on paid leave from his teaching job, soon resigned and was forced to give up his teaching credential. In October 2008, he was charged with three counts of sexual intercourse without consent. The age of consent in Montana is 16. But before the case came to trial, Cherice killed herself, complicating things for the prosecution.

A settlement was reached. Rambold was granted deferred prosecution and ordered to complete a sexual offender treatment program after which the charges would be dropped. He finished the first two of the program's three phases. But then he stopped coming to sessions. It was learned that he was having unsupervised visits with minors and had begun a sexual relationship with an adult without telling the program's supervisors. "The violations were serious enough when taken together to kick Rambold out of the program, although it was learned that the minors Rambold was visiting were family members." Of course, sexual offenders never ever prey on family members...


Former teacher in Montana gets 30 days in jail for raping student who later committed suicide
By Associated Press
August 27, 2013

BILLINGS, Mont. — A former Billings Senior High School teacher who pleaded guilty to raping a 14-year-old student who later killed herself has been sentenced to 30 days in jail by a judge who said the victim was “older than her chronological age” and “as much in control of the situation” as the teacher.

District Judge G. Todd Baugh sentenced Stacey Dean Rambold to 15 years in prison for sexual intercourse without consent, with all but 31 days suspended. He gave Rambold credit for one day already served, The Billings Gazette reported (http://bit.ly/1dmuHZo ).

The girl’s mother repeatedly screamed, “You people suck!” and stormed out of the courtroom Monday.

Rambold, now 54, was charged in October 2008 with three counts of sexual intercourse without consent alleging that he had an ongoing sexual relationship with Cherice Morales, starting the previous year when she was 14.

Morales took her own life in February 2010 while the case was pending.

In July 2010, Rambold entered a three-year deferred prosecution agreement with prosecutors that said the charges would be dismissed if Rambold completed a sex offender treatment program and met other conditions, including having no contact with children. He also admitted to one rape charge.

The case was revived last December when prosecutors learned Rambold had been terminated from the sex offender treatment program.

Treatment provider Michael Sullivan said Rambold started missing meetings in August 2012, but Sullivan said he met with Rambold and he appeared to be back on track with his treatment.

Rambold was terminated from the program in November when it was learned that he had been having unsupervised visits with minors, who were family members, and did not inform counselors that he had been having sexual relations with a woman.v Defense attorney Jay Lansing said Rambold has since continued his treatment with a different program and an evaluation found him at low risk to re-offend.

Baugh said he was not convinced that the reasons for Rambold’s termination from treatment were serious enough to warrant the 10-year prison term prosecutors recommended.v The judge said he listened to statements given by Morales before her death and believed that while she was a troubled youth, she was “as much in control of the situation” as Rambold and was “older than her chronological age.”

Yellowstone County Attorney Scott Twito told The Associated Press on Tuesday that he would not appeal the judge’s sentence.

“We respect the court’s sentencing decision. We obviously disagree with it, based on the recommendations my attorneys made, but it appears to be legally permissible,” he said.

Asked about Baugh’s reasoning that a 14-year-old girl below the state’s age of consent had an equal share of control of the relationship, Twito declined to answer directly.

“The judge’s reasons are his reasons and his reasons alone. He has broad authority under state law, given the proper criteria,” Twito said.

The case resulted in a $91,000 wrongful death settlement between the school district and Morales’ family.

Rambold reached a confidential settlement with the girl’s family.


Mont. judge apologizes for comments in teen's rape
By MATT VOLZ and MATTHEW BROWN
Associated Press
August 28, 2013

ILLINGS, Mont. (AP) — A Montana judge apologized Wednesday for saying a 14-year-old rape victim was "older than her chronological age" and had as much control of the situation as the teacher who raped her — remarks that prompted protests and a petition for his resignation.

District Judge G. Todd Baugh made the comments Monday while sentencing former Billings Senior High School teacher Stacey Rambold to a 15-year prison sentence then suspending all but 31 days and giving him credit for one day already served.

...Faced with backlash over his comments and the sentence that protesters considered too light, Baugh wrote an apology in a brief letter to the editor to The Billings Gazette. The newspaper provided a copy of the apology to The Associated Press.

"I'm not sure just what I was attempting to say but it did not come out correct," he wrote. "What I said is demeaning of all women, not what I believe and irrelevant to the sentencing. My apologies to all my fellow citizens."

"I will add an addendum to the court file to hopefully better explain the sentence," he added.

A protest scheduled for Thursday outside Yellowstone County Courthouse will go on despite the apology, said organizer Sheena Rice, stressing that it's important for the community to show it is not going to stand for victim blaming.

"I'm glad he apologized, but he should have known better as a judge," Rice said. "The fact that he said it makes me think he still believes it."

A petition will be circulated at the protest calling for Baugh's resignation. An online version of the petition had more than 8,500 signatures by Wednesday morning.

If the petition and protest aren't enough to force Baugh's resignation, protesters will shift to defeating him in the 2014 election, Rice said.

He was first elected to the bench in 1984 and has been re-elected every six years since then without an opponent.

Rambold was charged in October 2008 with three counts of sexual intercourse without consent after authorities alleged he had an ongoing sexual relationship with Cherice Moralez, starting the previous year when she was 14. Moralez killed herself in 2010 at age 16 while the case was pending.

The girl's mother, Auleia Hanlon, said in a statement to the Gazette that she no longer believes in justice after Baugh's sentence and remarks about her daughter.

"She wasn't even old enough to get a driver's license. But Judge Baugh, who never met our daughter, justified the paltry sentence saying she was older than her chronological age," Hanlon said. "I guess somehow it makes a rape more acceptable if you blame the victim, even if she was only 14."

Under state law, children younger than 16 cannot consent to sexual intercourse.

Judge Rules White Girl Will Be Tried As Black Adult

This post has been moved to HERE.

Terry Williams is facing the death penalty for killing a man who raped him for five years

Terry Williams is facing the death penalty
Change.org
Sept. 13, 2012

Terry Williams is facing the death penalty in three weeks for killing the man who repeatedly raped him.

But when Terry was convicted, the jury didn't know the whole story. At the time of his trial, jurors say they had no history or background of the sexual assault and abuse that Terry Williams had suffered for years.

Terry was brutally raped for five years, beginning when he was thirteen, by an older man he trusted -- Amos Norwood. When the jury learned his information after the trial, five jurors came forward to say that they no longer supported his death sentence. Even Norwood's widow has forgiven him, and does not want Terry to be executed.

Sign the petition on Change.org asking Governor Tom Corbett of Pennsylvania to stop Terry's execution scheduled on October 3 -- click here to add your name...

THE PETITION

Governor Tom Corbett, PA Board of Pardons, District Attorney Seth Williams: Grant Clemency to Terrance Williams, Survivor of Child Sexual Abuse
by Sue Osthoff
Philadelphia, PA

Signed with 74,762 supporters
25,238 NEEDED

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is preparing to execute Terrance “Terry” Williams on October 3, 2012, in spite of staunch opposition to his execution from the victim’s widow, five jurors from trial, child advocates, former prosecutors and judges, faith leaders, mental health professionals, law professors and others...

VISTA: Students given a false sense of justice in our courtrooms

Photo: Judge Richard G. Cline, attorney Kenneth Feinburg and Judge Ronald Styn in 2005



See all posts re Judge Richard Cline.

VISTA: Students get a taste of justice
August 03, 2011
By DEBORAH SULLIVAN BRENNAN
North County Times

Twenty-six middle school students got a taste of justice at the Vista Courthouse Tuesday through a program that introduces them to the legal system.

One student defended herself against charges of theft, and was ultimately led away in handcuffs for drug possession. Another student, her alleged accomplice, sat silent on the advice of his attorneys. The accuser was reprimanded by the judge for name-calling on the witness stand.

The gifted and talented students, whom their instructor, Gregg Primeaux, called "future leaders of the community," were role-playing a trial in the courtroom of Superior Court Judge Richard Cline, a co-founder of the civics curriculum, "On My Honor."

"I learned a lot about how the court works," said Miranda Colvin, 12, the seventh-grader from Aviara Oaks Middle School who played the defendant. "It was really fun because I got to put on handcuffs."

The program began in 1999 with a fourth-grade field trip to the courts, and expanded into a series of regionwide events, including "Youth in Court Day" and, more recently, the week-long summer symposium for gifted students. The programs are sponsored jointly by the San Diego Superior Court, the North County Bar Association, Cal State San Marcos, and local schools.

Cline said he developed the curriculum to supplement dwindling civics education, and counterbalance what he considers the poor depiction of judicial proceedings on television.

"It teaches students factual information about the (legal) process by participating in an active trial," Cline said. "And hopefully it teaches them respect for the law."

During the summer program, gifted students in grades 5-9 prepare a case with attorneys and judges, investigate case studies using technology labs, present legal arguments, debate complex issues, select jury members, explore rights and responsibilities as citizens, and take a tour of the court facilities.

"We wanted to bring a higher critical thinking opportunity for them during the summer, within the courts," Primeaux said, adding that the program aims to both cultivate legal literacy and inspire future legal professionals.

During the mock trial, a student, Emily, faced theft charges for allegedly stealing $200 of charitable donations from a teacher's desk during lunch hour. Fellow students testified that they suspected her of taking the cash, noting that they saw her in the classroom and watched her buy a new iPod.

However, they acknowledged they never saw her steal the money, and school administrators admitted that while they found the new iPod in her backpack, she told them she earned the money through odd jobs.

Throughout the mock trial, Cline offered judicial guidance on examining the evidence, and at one time reproached a witness, Colleen, for calling Emily a "liar and a loser" on the stand.

A dozen student jurors then weighed the testimony and declared Emily not guilty. In a final twist, however, Cline announced that a court search of Emily's backpack turned up a white, powdery substance found to be methamphetamine, and a student actor playing bailiff escorted her out of court in handcuffs...

[Maura Larkins comment: This seemed to be a real exercise in critical thinking--until that "final twist". Shame on the adults for pulling that parlor trick. The students were given the impression that in a typical case, defendants are wrongly found innocent. Obviously, the jury in the above exercise was right to find the girl innocent. Judge Cline would have done these students a service if he acknowledged that the outcome in the story below is more common in the US justice system. The idea that defendants bring methamphetmine to court in backpacks is silly, bordering on dishonest manipulation of children's minds. Judge Cline seems to want kids to believe that courts make mistakes when they find defendants not guilty.

A more typical situation can be seen in the following case, which, interestingly enough, involved a fifteen-year-old girl. (Perhaps Judge Cline should have included in his lesson an admonition not to make false allegations?) The defense attorney in the following case described our justice system to the innocent young man accused by the fifteen-year-old: "When you go into that courtroom the jury is going to see a big black teenager and you're automatically going to be assumed guilty."]



May 24, 2012
Onetime top Calif. football prospect exonerated after serving 5 years on rape charge
(CBS/AP)

A former high school football star whose dreams of a pro career were shattered by a rape conviction burst into tears Thursday as a judge threw out the charge that sent him to prison for more than five years.

Brian Banks, now 26, had pleaded no contest 10 years ago on the advice of his lawyer after a childhood friend falsely accused him of attacking her on their high school campus.

The district attorney offered Banks a deal -- plead guilty to rape and spend another 18 months in prison, or go to trial and face 41 years to life, CBS Los Angeles reports.

Banks said his defense attorney told him, "'When you go into that courtroom the jury is going to see a big black teenager and you're automatically going to be assumed guilty.' Those are her exact words."

In a strange turn of events, the woman, Wanetta Gibson, friended him on Facebook when he got out of prison.

In an initial meeting with him, she said she had lied; there had been no kidnap and no rape and she offered to help him clear his record, court records state.

But she refused to repeat the story to prosecutors because she feared she would have to return a $1.5 million payment from a civil suit brought by her mother against Long Beach schools.

During a second meeting that was secretly videotaped, she told Banks, "'I will go through with helping you but it's like at the same time all that money they gave us, I mean gave me, I don't want to have to pay it back,"' according to a defense investigator who was at the meeting.

It was uncertain Thursday whether Gibson will have to return the money.

Prosecutors also said they didn't immediately know if she might be prosecuted for making the false accusation when she was 15...

Banks said he had verbally agreed to attend USC on a four-year scholarship when he was arrested.

He still hopes to play professional football and has been working out regularly. His attorney Justin Brooks appealed to NFL teams to give him a chance.

Banks said outside court Thursday that he had lost all hope of proving his innocence until Gibson contacted him.

"It's been a struggle. But I'm unbroken and I'm still here today," the tall, muscular Banks said, tears flowing down his face.

He recalled being shocked and speechless on the day Gibson reached out to him after he had been released from prison, having served five years and two months...

In court, Deputy District Attorney Brentford Ferreira told Superior Court Judge Mark C. Kim that prosecutors agreed the case should be thrown out. Kim dismissed it immediately.

Banks had tried to win release while he was in prison, but Brooks, a law professor and head of the California Innocence Project at California Western School of Law in San Diego, said he could not have been exonerated without the woman coming forward and recanting her story.

Brooks said it was the first case he had ever taken in which the defendant had already served his time and had been free for a number of years.

Banks remained on probation, however, and was still wearing his electronic monitoring bracelet at Thursday's hearing. His lawyer said the first thing the two planned to do was report to probation officials and have it removed.

"The charges are dismissed now," Brooks said. "It's as if it didn't happen. ... It was the shortest, greatest proceeding I've ever been part of."

Banks had been arrested after Gibson said he met her in a school hallway and urged her to come into an elevator with him. The two had been friends since middle school and were in the habit of making out in a school stairwell, according to court papers.

There were contradictions in Gibson's story, as she told some people the rape happened in the elevator and others that it happened in the stairwell.

A kidnapping enhancement was added to the case because of the allegation Banks had taken her to the stairwell. That enhancement also was thrown out Thursday.

Which is more important: the public good or attorney-client privilege?

This story is brought to you by the folks who covered up sudden accelerations in vehicles. I think this lawyer did the right thing. I also think citizens should be prepared to pay a penalty for doing the right thing. Civil disobedience has made our society better, but you've got to be prepared to pay a price when you're working to make the world better. I think lawyers should started taking responsibility for the injustices brought about by dishonesty in our legal system. I believe some things are more important than attorney-client privilege. I also think that priests should violate the sanctity of the confessional in order to protect innocent victims. (Of course, I suspect that this lawyer can easily afford to pay this judgment.)

Toyota wins $2.6-million judgment against former attorney
By Ken Bensinger
Los Angeles Times
January 6, 2011

Toyota Motor Corp. has won a $2.6-million arbitration judgment against a former in-house attorney who had accused the company of a conspiracy to hide evidence in product safety litigation.

The Japanese automaker had vigorously denied the allegations of its ex-attorney, Dimitrios Biller, who helped the company manage vehicle rollover lawsuits out of its U.S. offices in Torrance for four years.

Toyota instead contended that the attorney had violated a confidentiality agreement and attorney-client privilege by taking thousands of company documents with him when he left the company in 2007, later releasing and discussing some of them publicly.

Save Up to 90%: Sign up for our free daily e-mail to get in on exclusive deals around L.A. Powered by Groupon. Subscribe Now.

In a ruling this week, arbitrator Gary L. Taylor sided decisively with the world's largest automaker.

"Mr. Biller did the professionally unthinkable: He betrayed the confidences of his client," Taylor, a retired federal judge, wrote in his 15-page judgment Tuesday. "He intentionally and repeatedly disclosed confidential information and documents in violation of ethical, statutory and contractual prohibitions."

Biller, who took a $3.7-million severance from Toyota, did not return calls and e-mails seeking comment.

The Pacific Palisades resident had previously defended his actions, asserting that he witnessed criminal wrongdoing including fraud, and that in such cases attorney-client privilege does not apply.

Taylor's decision is a significant legal victory for the embattled automaker, which has been struggling to restore its reputation in the face of waves of quality and safety recalls, as well as lawsuits related to allegations that its vehicles are prone to sudden acceleration...

Five federal judges say California may be about to execute an innocent man

Framed for Murder?
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
New York Times
December 8, 2010

“California may be about to execute an innocent man.”

That’s the view of five federal judges in a case involving Kevin Cooper, a black man in California who faces lethal injection next year for supposedly murdering a white family. The judges argue compellingly that he was framed by police.

Mr. Cooper’s impending execution is so outrageous that it has produced a mutiny among these federal circuit court judges, distinguished jurists just one notch below the United States Supreme Court. But the judicial process has run out for Mr. Cooper. Now it’s up to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to decide whether to commute Mr. Cooper’s sentence before leaving office.

This case, an illuminating window into the pitfalls of capital punishment, dates to a horrific quadruple-murder in June 1983. Doug and Peggy Ryen were stabbed to death in their house, along with their 10-year-old daughter and an 11-year-old houseguest. The Ryens’ 8-year-old son, Josh, was left for dead but survived. They were all white.

Josh initially told investigators that the crime had been committed by three people, all white, although by the trial he suggested that he had seen just one person with an Afro. The first version made sense because the weapons included a hatchet, an ice pick and one or two knives. Could one intruder juggling several weapons overpower five victims, including a 200-pound former Marine like Doug Ryen, who also had a loaded rifle nearby?

But the police learned that Mr. Cooper had walked away from the minimum security prison where he was serving a burglary sentence and had hidden in an empty home 125 yards away from the crime scene. The police decided that he had committed the crime alone.

William A. Fletcher, a federal circuit judge, explained his view of what happens in such cases in a law school lecture at Gonzaga University, in which he added that Mr. Cooper is “probably” innocent: “The police are under heavy pressure to solve a high-profile crime. They know, or think they know, who did the crime. And they plant evidence to help their case along.”

Judge Fletcher wrote an extraordinary judicial opinion — more than 100 pages when it was released — dissenting from the refusal of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to rehear the case. The opinion is a 21st-century version of Émile Zola’s famous “J’Accuse.”

Mr. Fletcher, a well-respected judge and former law professor, was joined in his “J’Accuse” by four other circuit judges. Six more wrote their own dissents calling for the full Ninth Circuit to rehear the case. But they fell just short of the votes needed for rehearing.

Judge Fletcher laid out countless anomalies in the case. Mr. Cooper’s blood showed up on a beige T-shirt apparently left by a murderer near the scene, but that blood turned out to have a preservative in it — the kind of preservative used by police when they keep blood in test tubes.

Then a forensic scientist found that a sample from the test tube of Mr. Cooper’s blood held by police actually contained blood from more than one person. That leads Mr. Cooper’s defense team and Judge Fletcher to believe that someone removed blood and then filled the tube back to the top with someone else’s blood.

The police also ignored other suspects. A woman and her sister told police that a housemate, a convicted murderer who had completed his sentence, had shown up with several other people late on the night of the murders, wearing blood-spattered overalls and driving a station wagon similar to the one stolen from the murdered family.

They said that the man was no longer wearing the beige T-shirt he had on earlier in the evening — the same kind as the one found near the scene. And his hatchet, which resembled the one found near the bodies, was missing from his tool area. The account was supported by a prison confession and by witnesses who said they saw a similar group in blood-spattered clothes in a nearby bar that night. The women gave the bloody overalls to the police for testing, but the police, by now focused on Mr. Cooper, threw the overalls in the trash.

This case is a travesty...

Chief justice unsettled by Obama's criticism of Supreme Court

See also Justice Roberts rules that $3 million campaign contribution is no reason to require a judge to recuse himself.

Chief justice unsettled by Obama's criticism of Supreme Court
LA Times
By David G. Savage
March 10, 2010

...Obama's speech in January came a week after the high court ruled 5 to 4 that corporations had a free-speech right to spend unlimited sums to elect or defeat candidates for office.

The president, looking down at the six justices in attendance, sharply criticized the Supreme Court for having "opened the floodgates for special interests" to sway elections.

Senate Democrats rose to their feet, applauding and cheering the president's comments...

When Obama voiced his criticism, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. shook his head slightly and appeared to say, "Not true."

Responding to Roberts' comments Tuesday night, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said in a statement, "What is troubling is that this decision opened the floodgates for corporations and special interests to pour money into elections, drowning out the voices of average Americans."

VISTA: Judge orders new trial for failure to share evidence

Question: How do you tell the prosecutors from the prosecuted in San Diego?

Answer: Perhaps you can tell by seeing who refuses to follow the law.

See all posts about District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis.


VISTA: Judge orders new trial for failure to share evidence
Judge finds prosecutor failed to notify defense of fingerprint
North County Times
By TERI FIGUEROA
February 9, 2010

An ex-con facing life in prison for allegedly swiping two bikes will get a new trial because of a prosecutor's "willful omission" of sharing fingerprint evidence, a judge ruled Wednesday.

San Diego Superior Court Judge Harry Elias' ruling did not address the larger concerns raised by a senior member of San Diego County public defender's office in Vista of allegedly systemic failures by prosecutors to turn over evidence. Attorneys had used the theft case as a platform to air those complaints.

But the judge's 15-page ruling focused solely on the dispute in the criminal case against accused thief Kenneth Ray Bowles. At issue: a fingerprint on a pawn ticket for one of the stolen bicycles.

Elias declined to dismiss Bowles' case, finding the strength of other evidence against Bowles probably would have led a jury to find him guilty of stealing and pawning the bikes.

Late last fall, a North County jury convicted Bowles of theft and burglary. During a post-conviction proceeding, his attorney learned that one of the pawn tickets had a fingerprint that could not be definitively matched to Bowles.

The judge said in his decision there was a "significant and substantial violation" of the evidence rules when the prosecutor failed to tell the defense that the inconclusive finding had been left out of the report by the forensic fingerprint expert.

Elias found that the prosecutor, Vanessa DuVall, had "an affirmative duty" to share that information. Elias ordered a new trial for two of the three charges Bowles faced.

Elias said the "willful omission" of sharing inconclusive fingerprint evidence was not so severe that it would have changed the jury's finding of Bowles' guilt. Elias noted other evidence in the case, including a security camera recording of the theft and Bowles confession to investigators.

Elias also said he considered issuing an order of contempt for the deputy district attorney, but opted against it because a fine would not solve the damage done to Bowles.

Requests for comment by prosecutors were referred to Paul Levikow, spokesman for the San Diego County district attorney's office. Levikow declined comment because the criminal case is still pending. DuVall also declined comment.

Defense attorney Kathleen Cannon, a senior member of the Vista branch of the public defender's office, called the ruling "reasoned and thoughtful."

Late last month, Cannon told Elias in court that there had been "a continuing pattern of failure" to turn over evidence.

She pointed to two recent cases in which she said prosecutors violated the rules. In a gang rape case, the prosecutor did not give the victim's statements to defense attorneys. In another case, the prosecution is alleged to have failed to turn over a bloody knife ---- evidence that actually could have worked in favor of the defense.

Neither of those cases went to trial; the defendants took plea deals offered by prosecutors. But the bicycle case did reach a jury, and Bowles was found guilty...

When Kentucky prosecutor charged Edwin Chandler, had no second thoughts. Now innocent man is exonerated after 9-year jail term

His conviction for manslaughter and robbery in Whitfield's death was vacated just hours after a Jefferson County grand jury indicted 45-year-old repeat offender Percy Phillips for her death. Phillips is already serving a 20-year sentence for assault.

October 13, 2009
Man's conviction set aside in 1993 shooting death
Courier-Journal Louisville, Kentucky
By Jessie Halladay
and Jason Riley

For 16 years, Edwin Chandler faithfully believed the day would come when everyone would know he wasn't the man who shot Brenda Whitfield in the head during a 1993 robbery at the Chevron station where she worked.

That day finally arrived Tuesday, when Jefferson Circuit Judge Fred Cowan vacated the manslaughter and robbery charges against Chandler after prosecutors and police announced they had convicted the wrong man...

When Steve Schroering prosecuted Chandler in 1995, he said he had no doubt that the right man went to prison.

[Maura Larkins comment: Prosecutors never have any second thoughts, do they?]

“It was never a case I had second thoughts about until this morning” when Commonwealth's Attorney Dave Stengel called to tell him the conviction was being set aside.

After all, a store video camera captured the crime and an eyewitness tentatively identified Chandler. Fingerprints, a knit cap and sunglasses were found at the scene. And Chandler made a taped confession to detectives, admitting to the robbery and saying the shooting was accidental.

But the fingerprints didn't match Chandler's, the owner of the cap and sunglasses was uncertain, and Chandler said he falsely confessed, coerced by police scare tactics and coaching.

Chandler said then-Detective Mark Handy told Chandler he believed he was lying and threatened to charge his sister and girlfriend with harboring a fugitive if he didn't tell the truth.

Chandler said he was a few blocks away, watching a movie with his girlfriend. He remembers seeing a swarm of police cars but didn't know what had happened.

Police focused on Chandler after a witness identified him near the scene, and he already was wanted on a jail-escape charge...

But Chandler's jurors never heard some of the information that could have helped acquit him.

They never heard from John Gray, who was pumping gasoline when the shooting occurred. Gray left his name with a county officer at the scene, but it was never passed on to the city officers investigating the case..

In 1996, Gray was serving time in prison with Chandler and told him he saw the shooter and his name was Percy...

ORDINARY INJUSTICE: How America Holds Court by Amy Bach

ORDINARY INJUSTICE: How America Holds Court
by Amy Bach

"A disturbing and urgent call to reform." --Booklist

"A clear exposure of a dirty secret well known to lawyers and apt to outrage everyone else."
--Kirkus Reviews

"This is a magnificent work, a crusading call for reform in the tradition of Rachel Carson's Silent Spring or Ralph Nader's Unsafe at Any Speed . . . This groundbreaking book deserves widespread attention."
--Doris Kearns Goodwin, author of Team of Rivals

The stories of grave injustice are all too familiar: the lawyer who sleeps through a trial, the false confessions, the convictions of the innocent.

However, the less visible failures of justice meted out by America's defective system receive scant attention unless you've personally experienced it. Attorney and journalist Amy Bach has spent the last eight years investigating the chronic lapses in courts across America...

ORDINARY INJUSTICE: How America Holds Court (Metropolitan Books/September 1, 2009) goes well beyond one particular injustice, one specific court, or one aspect of the legal system. Instead, Bach conducts a sweeping investigation that moves from small-town Georgia to upstate New York, from Chicago to Mississippi, recounting fascinating stories that reveal a deep culture of complicity among prosecutors, defenders, and judges--a complicity that puts the interests of the system above the court's obligation to the people...

Here are cases where brutal domestic assault and child rape go unpunished, where indigent defendants are coerced into guilty pleas without being notified of their right to a public defender, where bail for offenses like riding a bike on a sidewalk is set at $25,000.

In Quitman County, Mississippi, we meet Brenda Wiggs, a court clerk who keeps a list of cases that mysteriously never reach a courtroom; the county, she asserts, has not prosecuted a domestic violence case in twenty-one years...

Why is this happening? Bach goes beyond the easy explanations of bad apples and meager funding to show how in the name of expedience legal professionals routinely choose to collaborate rather than face off as adversaries...

AMY BACH, a member of the New York Bar, has written on law for The Nation, The American Lawyer, and New York Magazine, and has taught legal studies at the University of Rochester.