Post by SoulTrainOz on Jul 27, 2006 6:09:28 GMT -5
A capital defendent in Decatur will at least get a new trial, because prosecutors and police withheld evidence that could have helped him establish his innocence. This is a story that shouldn't be familiar, but it is.
The Birmingham News, opinion
It's not often a death-penalty defendant wins a new trial and considers it a setback.
But the new trial ordered for Daniel Wade Moore is a setback for the defense. That's because Moore, sentenced to die in the 1999 slaying of a Morgan County woman, initially won a full measure of freedom when his conviction was reversed.
The judge who tried Moore - and sentenced him to death - said prosecutors had "squandered" their right to try Moore a second time. He threw out the case altogether.
The Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals wouldn't go that far. It said prosecutors should try again, but agreed in a 5-0 ruling Moore's first conviction could not stand.
Why? Because prosecutors and police withheld information that could have helped Moore's defense.
In particular, Morgan County Circuit Judge Glenn E. Thompson referred to 245 pages of information that authorities had turned over to the FBI, but not to the defense. "The information ... included the names of others who had the means, motive and opportunity to commit the crime of which the defendant was
accused," Thompson wrote.
In other words, authorities kept hidden precisely the kind of information a defense lawyer should have.
Thompson said Assistant Attorney General Don Valeska and Decatur police investigator Mike Pettey did this purposefully, their conduct going "beyond mere negligence and ... (rising) to the level of intentional misconduct."
Among the people who should be most upset about this are taxpayers. Whether Moore should stand trial again for the death of Karen Tipton - we'll leave that question to the legal beagles - taxpayers should know they are having to bear the expense because of prosecutors' wrongdoing. And it's not OK.
Prosecuting criminals is not some game, where winning is all that matters and playing hide-and-seek with evidence is a good strategy. Prosecutors and police must seek the truth and justice, and they must do their jobs in a spirit of exceedingly fair play. That's why courts require prosecutors to give defendants any evidence that might help the defendants. (The best death-penalty prosecutors know it makes the most sense to turn over
everything, on the off-chance some withheld snippet will be deemed beneficial to the defense and result in a reversal.)
But too many Alabama prosecutors continue to take shortcuts that result in costly retrials or, the even worse alternative, unjust results.
Prosecutorial misconduct is one of the main reasons death penalty convictions are overturned on appeal, according to a Columbia University study. Withholding this kind of evidence isn't the only problem area, but it is a recurring theme.
Prosecutors may get a second shot at convicting Moore. But it's a retrial that could have been avoided if they'd been more interested in justice than winning.
Source : The Birmingham News
www.al.com/opinion/birminghamnews/index.ssf?/base/opinion/11538190111
The Birmingham News, opinion
It's not often a death-penalty defendant wins a new trial and considers it a setback.
But the new trial ordered for Daniel Wade Moore is a setback for the defense. That's because Moore, sentenced to die in the 1999 slaying of a Morgan County woman, initially won a full measure of freedom when his conviction was reversed.
The judge who tried Moore - and sentenced him to death - said prosecutors had "squandered" their right to try Moore a second time. He threw out the case altogether.
The Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals wouldn't go that far. It said prosecutors should try again, but agreed in a 5-0 ruling Moore's first conviction could not stand.
Why? Because prosecutors and police withheld information that could have helped Moore's defense.
In particular, Morgan County Circuit Judge Glenn E. Thompson referred to 245 pages of information that authorities had turned over to the FBI, but not to the defense. "The information ... included the names of others who had the means, motive and opportunity to commit the crime of which the defendant was
accused," Thompson wrote.
In other words, authorities kept hidden precisely the kind of information a defense lawyer should have.
Thompson said Assistant Attorney General Don Valeska and Decatur police investigator Mike Pettey did this purposefully, their conduct going "beyond mere negligence and ... (rising) to the level of intentional misconduct."
Among the people who should be most upset about this are taxpayers. Whether Moore should stand trial again for the death of Karen Tipton - we'll leave that question to the legal beagles - taxpayers should know they are having to bear the expense because of prosecutors' wrongdoing. And it's not OK.
Prosecuting criminals is not some game, where winning is all that matters and playing hide-and-seek with evidence is a good strategy. Prosecutors and police must seek the truth and justice, and they must do their jobs in a spirit of exceedingly fair play. That's why courts require prosecutors to give defendants any evidence that might help the defendants. (The best death-penalty prosecutors know it makes the most sense to turn over
everything, on the off-chance some withheld snippet will be deemed beneficial to the defense and result in a reversal.)
But too many Alabama prosecutors continue to take shortcuts that result in costly retrials or, the even worse alternative, unjust results.
Prosecutorial misconduct is one of the main reasons death penalty convictions are overturned on appeal, according to a Columbia University study. Withholding this kind of evidence isn't the only problem area, but it is a recurring theme.
Prosecutors may get a second shot at convicting Moore. But it's a retrial that could have been avoided if they'd been more interested in justice than winning.
Source : The Birmingham News
www.al.com/opinion/birminghamnews/index.ssf?/base/opinion/11538190111