Post by Anja on Jun 9, 2006 15:32:32 GMT -5
Forget Damon, Affleck: 2 lawyers are the real stars
WERE IT NOT for 2 Philadelphia lawyers, by now John Thompson would have
been dead for 6 years and 3 weeks.
He would have been executed on May 20, 1999, for a crime he didn't commit.
The saga is so dramatic that soon it will be enshrined in a Hollywood
movie with Ben Affleck and Matt Damon playing lawyers Michael Banks and J.
Gordon Cooney Jr., respectively.
But the fundamental story has become frighteningly routine: death-row
inmates who are saved from execution by evidence of their innocence.
According to Amnesty International, 122 such prisoners have been
exonerated since 1973.
What's deeply chilling about the Thompson case is that there was nothing
at first glance to suggest he was innocent - nothing to make it a moral
cause celebre.
"There were no red flags," Banks said at a Philadelphia Bar Association
presentation about the case last week.
Thompson was exonerated only because Banks and Cooney, partners at Morgan,
Lewis & Bockius, wanted to do a pro-bono capital case to ensure that a
death-row inmate had received a fair trial.
And Thompson hadn't.
If you're on the fence about capital punishment, as I have been -
vacillating between horror at the growing number of death-row inmates who
turn out to be innocent, and rage at the brutal killers responsible for
the daily carnage in our streets - this case may settle the issue for you.
It did for me.
Banks' and Cooney's initial goal wasn't necessarily to free the man whose
case was sent to them in 1988 by a Louisiana capital-defense lawyer. They
wanted only to seek a retrial if there had been irregularities in the
proceedings.
Thompson was a small-time criminal who fenced stolen property, including
guns. He'd been convicted of the 1984 robbery-murder of a New Orleans man.
Though Thompson insisted he didn't commit the crime, Cooney and Banks had
no compelling reason to believe him.
After all, he'd been found in possession of the murder weapon and the
victim's ring.
Still, it was clear that he hadn't received a fair trial, Cooney said. To
say the least.
The lawyers' investigation revealed everything from prosecutorial
misconduct to juror intimidation, from concealed evidence to eyewitnesses
who never were called to testify.
The disturbing revelations made it clear that the lawyers weren't dealing
with a man who just deserved a new trial, but with an innocent man who
deserved to be freed.
Thompson, it turned out, had bought the weapon and ring to fence from the
real killer.
Still, the recalcitrant court system dealt them one agonizing setback
after another until they won a retrial in 2003.
Thompson was acquitted and freed after 18 years in prison. He's now
married and has lived a law-abiding, productive life in New Orleans ever
since.
The evidence against Thompson had been compelling. And that's what makes
the case so terrifying.
There was no DNA to clear him - as there isn't in most cases, Cooney said,
despite the popular conception to the contrary.
Without the methodical re-examination of all the evidence and testimony,
the truth would have remained concealed.
How many cases are there like that? Without obvious evidence of innocence?
Without DNA?
How many of the 60 people who were executed last year alone could have
been saved by lawyers like Cooney and Banks?
The case was enough to convert Cooney to Banks' point of view: that the
death penalty is "simply inappropriate."
It converted me, too.
(source: Commentary, Jill Porter, Philadelphia Daily News)
WERE IT NOT for 2 Philadelphia lawyers, by now John Thompson would have
been dead for 6 years and 3 weeks.
He would have been executed on May 20, 1999, for a crime he didn't commit.
The saga is so dramatic that soon it will be enshrined in a Hollywood
movie with Ben Affleck and Matt Damon playing lawyers Michael Banks and J.
Gordon Cooney Jr., respectively.
But the fundamental story has become frighteningly routine: death-row
inmates who are saved from execution by evidence of their innocence.
According to Amnesty International, 122 such prisoners have been
exonerated since 1973.
What's deeply chilling about the Thompson case is that there was nothing
at first glance to suggest he was innocent - nothing to make it a moral
cause celebre.
"There were no red flags," Banks said at a Philadelphia Bar Association
presentation about the case last week.
Thompson was exonerated only because Banks and Cooney, partners at Morgan,
Lewis & Bockius, wanted to do a pro-bono capital case to ensure that a
death-row inmate had received a fair trial.
And Thompson hadn't.
If you're on the fence about capital punishment, as I have been -
vacillating between horror at the growing number of death-row inmates who
turn out to be innocent, and rage at the brutal killers responsible for
the daily carnage in our streets - this case may settle the issue for you.
It did for me.
Banks' and Cooney's initial goal wasn't necessarily to free the man whose
case was sent to them in 1988 by a Louisiana capital-defense lawyer. They
wanted only to seek a retrial if there had been irregularities in the
proceedings.
Thompson was a small-time criminal who fenced stolen property, including
guns. He'd been convicted of the 1984 robbery-murder of a New Orleans man.
Though Thompson insisted he didn't commit the crime, Cooney and Banks had
no compelling reason to believe him.
After all, he'd been found in possession of the murder weapon and the
victim's ring.
Still, it was clear that he hadn't received a fair trial, Cooney said. To
say the least.
The lawyers' investigation revealed everything from prosecutorial
misconduct to juror intimidation, from concealed evidence to eyewitnesses
who never were called to testify.
The disturbing revelations made it clear that the lawyers weren't dealing
with a man who just deserved a new trial, but with an innocent man who
deserved to be freed.
Thompson, it turned out, had bought the weapon and ring to fence from the
real killer.
Still, the recalcitrant court system dealt them one agonizing setback
after another until they won a retrial in 2003.
Thompson was acquitted and freed after 18 years in prison. He's now
married and has lived a law-abiding, productive life in New Orleans ever
since.
The evidence against Thompson had been compelling. And that's what makes
the case so terrifying.
There was no DNA to clear him - as there isn't in most cases, Cooney said,
despite the popular conception to the contrary.
Without the methodical re-examination of all the evidence and testimony,
the truth would have remained concealed.
How many cases are there like that? Without obvious evidence of innocence?
Without DNA?
How many of the 60 people who were executed last year alone could have
been saved by lawyers like Cooney and Banks?
The case was enough to convert Cooney to Banks' point of view: that the
death penalty is "simply inappropriate."
It converted me, too.
(source: Commentary, Jill Porter, Philadelphia Daily News)