Another Black Man Exonerated in Texas.

I love the Dallas County DA - they're clearing these cases at an unbelievable rate...

Hard to believe so many innocent black men were imprisoned in Texas to begin with. They'd die in prison without DNA to exonerate them. A bunch of people already are.

--------------------------------

Dallas County man cleared in 1979 rape, robbery will be Texas' longest-serving exoneree

12:00 AM CST on Tuesday, January 4, 2011

By JENNIFER EMILY / The Dallas Morning News
jemily@dallasnews.com

Two men convicted in connection with a 1979 Dallas rape, robbery and abduction have been cleared of the crime through DNA testing. They have served about three decades in prison – more than any other Texas inmate cleared by DNA testing.

The exonerations are also the first where DNA testing has been used in Dallas County to prove men innocent of crimes that occurred as far back as the 1970s. Until recently, authorities thought that evidence had only been preserved by the county's crime lab since 1981, said Nina Morrison of the Innocence Project in New York. The discovery that other testable evidence exists could mean Dallas County's national record number of 20 exonerations since 2001 will keep growing.

"It may provide grounds to go back and look at other evidence from older cases where we thought there was nothing to test," Morrison said. "It's really a miracle it was saved."

Cornelius Dupree Jr., 51, is expected to be exonerated today in a Dallas County courtroom. He is on parole after having been released in July. He spent more than 30 years in prison.

His exoneration, the 21st, will be the first in Dallas County since May 2009, although three other men have been cleared since then with other evidence.

The second man, Anthony Ray Massingill, 49, will remain behind bars for now while authorities search for evidence to test in a second rape for which he is serving a life sentence.

Neither Dupree nor Massingill could be reached for comment. They were wrongly convicted in a Nov. 23, 1979, attack on a 26-year-old woman who was confronted at gunpoint along with a male friend after they stopped for cigarettes and to use a pay phone at a liquor store on Dolphin Road, north of Interstate 30.

The attackers carjacked the victims and eventually ordered the man from the car. They then raped the woman while holding a gun on her. They debated whether to kill her before shoving her out of the vehicle and threatening to kill her if she called the police. She was found unconscious in a median by a police officer.

Five or six days later, two men tried to sell the woman's rabbit fur coat at a grocery store two miles from the liquor store. The stolen car was found in the parking lot. Dupree and Massingill are not believed to be these men.

Dupree and Massingill were arrested Dec. 1, 1979, two miles from where the abduction occurred. Police initially stopped them because they matched the description of men wanted in connection with a similar case. Massingill had a gun; Dupree was unarmed.

Wrongly identified

Paul Cates, also of the Innocence Project, said the rape victim wrongly identified Dupree and Massingill in a photo lineup. The male victim could not pick out Dupree or Massingill.

At trial, both victims identified Dupree as one of the men who abducted them. Cates said that the woman, at times, confused the identities of the two defendants when identifying them in court.

Massingill was sentenced to three 10-year terms and a life sentence in connection with the liquor store abduction and another 1979 rape-robbery.

Dupree was sentenced to 75 years in prison for the liquor store robbery. He was not tried on the liquor store abduction-rape because prosecutors thought it wouldn't result in any more prison time. Although he was a suspect, a grand jury declined to indict him in the second 1979 robbery-abduction.

Evidence preserved

The Innocence Project accepted the case in 2007 after an intense review. Morrison said Dupree had written to them a few years earlier.

The Innocence Project first contacted the Dallas County district attorney's office about the case in 2008. The district attorney's office then asked the crime lab to search for any evidence in the case.

The lab found and tested pubic hairs from the victim's rape exam that contained genetic material from two men who were not Dupree and Massingill. Had the hair not contained two other men's DNA, neither Dupree nor Massingill would have likely been cleared in the case, Morrison said.

Morrison said that even if the crime lab does not find DNA to test in Massingill's other case, it's possible he could still be freed. She said that authorities at the time believed the same men were responsible for both crimes.

Morrison said the real perpetrators have not been identified, but she was not sure whether the test results had been compared with a national DNA database.

The Dallas County district attorney's office said Monday that prosecutors would answer questions about the case today. Massingill's attorney, Michelle Moore of the Dallas County public defender's office, declined to comment.

Preliminary tests showing Dupree's innocence came back two weeks after he was paroled because of time he'd earned through good behavior. The results of the final test – DNA from the victim confirming that the lab correctly labeled the sample – were not available until December.

Morrison said Dupree could have been released on parole earlier if he had admitted his guilt. But like many exonerees, he refused to do so. 

Scott Watch: Free at Last, Free at Last.

Spread the word: Both Justice and Grace prevailed in Mississippi this week - Jamie and Gladys Scott are to be set free at last...

Thank Governor Barbour at 601.359.3150

------------------------------------------------

Mississippi Governor's Office
Dec. 29, 2010

GOV. BARBOUR’S STATEMENT REGARDING RELEASE OF SCOTT SISTERS

"Today, I have issued two orders indefinitely suspending the sentences of Jamie and Gladys Scott. In 1994, a Scott County jury convicted the sisters of armed robbery and imposed two life sentences for the crime. Their convictions and their sentences were affirmed by the Mississippi Court of Appeals in 1996.

"To date, the sisters have served 16 years of their sentences and are eligible for parole in 2014. Jamie Scott requires regular dialysis, and her sister has offered to donate one of her kidneys to her. The Mississippi Department of Corrections believes the sisters no longer pose a threat to society. Their incarceration is no longer necessary for public safety or rehabilitation, and Jamie Scott's medical condition creates a substantial cost to the State of Mississippi.

"The Mississippi Parole Board reviewed the sisters' request for a pardon and recommended that I neither pardon them, nor commute their sentence. At my request, the Parole Board subsequently reviewed whether the sisters should be granted an indefinite suspension of sentence, which is tantamount to parole, and have concurred with my decision to suspend their sentences indefinitely.

"Gladys Scott's release is conditioned on her donating one of her kidneys to her sister, a procedure which should be scheduled with urgency. The release date for Jamie and Gladys Scott is a matter for the Department of Corrections.

"I would like to thank Representative George Flaggs, Senator John Horne, Senator Willie Simmons, and Representative Credell Calhoun for their leadership on this issue. These legislators, along with former Mayor Charles Evers, have been in regular contact with me and my staff while the sisters' petition has been under review."

Prosecuting Innocence: Resistance is (damn near) Futile

----------Mental Illness Awareness Week: October 3-9, 2010-----------

Article originally posted Thursday, February 25, 2010.

Resurrected for the Arpaio 5 and the Freedom March.

The sentencing committee meeting was canceled again today, by the way - I have no idea when it's rescheduled for. I hung out at the Capitol awhile anyway, handing out copies of Tenacious to the women legislators I could find, since it was "Women's Day at the Legislature" today, and I didn't think they'd made any arrangements for state prisoners to participate or talk to their legislators. I also left one for Governor Brewer, with an article done by a woman who had cancer while at Perryville a few years back. She's now with an organization that helps women in prison. I'll post her story here when I get permission.

I hope those legislators I gave the zines to actually bother to read them. I don't know when or how they're going to hear a woman prisoner's voice address their conditions otherwise. Maybe we should try to get them to hold hearings out at the prisons themselves. Given the Arizona Republic and Lumley Vampire reports on the physical condition of the facilities alone, they should have organized an emergency oversight committee to check it out in person. The legislature is responsible, after all, for compromising the safety of state prisoners and corrections employees in the first place. They've now been duly warned that they'll be held liable for failing to follow up on it.

Anyway, the following article is very pertinent to the work of the House Sentencing Committee - and most of the issues I have with Andrew Thomas' office. In fact, this is a very good reason why we don't want that man to be Attorney General. He'll be putting ten times as many innocent people away, while letting the really guilty ones walk by making questionable deals - like the one that put the Scott Sisters away. The innocent don't have anything to fear, they think, nor do they have anything to trade. The guilty, on the other hand - the "triggermen" - can trade them.

There's nothing guaranteed to get you a more severe punishment in America than insisting that you're innocent and losing to the prosecutor at trial - and they make sure you know that when they make their offer. Their job is to prove guilt, not to find truth - don't make any mistakes about that. They're out to get convictions, by and large - not to protect the innocent. Victims are just useful tools to win their cases with, and to use to promote their own tough-on-crime image.

There are a few remarkable exceptions to that rule, of course. Some DA's have been very committed to investigating reports of wrongful prosecutions/convictions. I hope that's the beginning of a trend towards more ethical, responsible prosecutorial conduct. I have yet to see evidence of that happening in Arizona, though.

Borrowed the post below from our friends at Idaho Prison Watch...

-------------

What is Wrong with the Plea Bargain System in our Courts Today?

Frontline Interview with
John H. Langbein

John Langbein is a professor of law and legal history at Yale Law School. In this interview, he describes how the plea bargain system pressures people to buckle and accept a plea-even if they are innocent-and how prosecutors, judges and defense attorneys have a role, a stake even, in seeing that this happens. He also talks about the Supreme Court's indifference to the pressures on a defendant in the plea process, and why he believes the rampant growth of pleas is rooted in the trial system's failures.

(I have condensed this interview for the sake of this forum. You can view the entire interview on the link I provided below)

Q: "What is wrong with the plea bargain system in our courts today?"

Plea bargaining is a system that is best described as one of condemnation without adjudication. It is a system that replaces trial, which is what our constitution intended, with deals.

Second, those deals are coerced. The prosecutor is basically forcing people to waive their rights to jury trial by threatening them with ever greater sanctions if they refuse to plead and instead demand the right to jury trial.
But every defendant has a right to go to trial; it's a choice they make to plead guilty.

The problem with choice arguments is that they neglect the main dynamic of plea bargan which is the pressure that the prosecutor puts on you to do it his way.

Plea bargain works by threat. What the prosecutor says to a criminal defendant in plea bargaining is, "Surrender your right to jury trial, or if you go to trial and are convicted of an offense, we will see to it that you are punished twice. Once for the offense, and once for having had the temerity to exercise your right to jury trial." THAT is a coercive system.

And the prosecutor has many devices which increase the level of coercion: multiplying the counts, threatening to recommend the most severe end of the sentence range, keeping you locked up in pretrial detention if you're poor - most people who are in the criminal justice system are poor - prosecuting your wife as well as yourself, and things of this sort. The prosecutor can pile it on if you don't play it his way. It is therefore a deeply coercive system. Yes, you have a choice, but your choice is constrained by coercion.

Q: What is the role of the defense lawyer?

Sometimes defense counsel does a very good job for people in the plea bargaining process, and gets you a good deal. But there are many other outcomes.

In the public defender system the defense counsel is representing a hundred other people; the defense counsel can not take every case to trial....

Defense counsel in some circumstances is not very competent and is delighted simply to take his money and run, so to speak."

"So there's no particular reason to think that defense counsel is any serious answer to the intrinsically coercive nature of plea bargaining."

Q: Whom does the system benefit?

The main winner in the plea bargaining process is the prosecutor. I describe plea bargaining as a system of prosecutorial tyranny..."

What has happened is that a single officer, the prosecutor, now is in charge of investigating, charging--that is, bringing formal charges--deciding whether to prosecute, evaluating that evidence, deciding whether or not in his or her judgment you're guilty or not, and then basically sentencing you.

"....what we have now is a system in which one officer, and indeed a somewhat dangerous officer, the prosecutor, has complete power over the fate of the criminal accused."

Q: You let the defense attorney off lightly.

I think defense counsel is to some extent at the mercy of a bad system. There's not a lot you can do when the other guy has all the chips. And the prosecutor has an awesome pile of chips in our plea bargaining system, because the prosecutor can threaten ever larger sanctions if you don't do what he wants.

So I believe that by far the worst failure in the plea bargaining system is the prosecutor, and I think that's in part because the prosecutor is not always as noble as he would like you to believe he is."

"It's a lot easier to coerce somebody into waiving all his defenses than to actually investigate the case thoroughly..."

But, again, the trial is there for anyone who chooses that option.

It is true that one always has the right to go to trial, but the prosecutor can make that right so costly that only a fool will exercise the right..."

Part of the reason why we in this country have criminal sentences that are so much more severe than in the rest of the civilized world, is the need that prosecutors have to threaten people with these huge sentences in order to get them to waive the right to jury trial...."

".... most people (in the system) are too poor to afford bail, and these people are particularly likely to yield to the demand that they confess whatever it is they're being charged with rather than wait for some kind of trial, because they'll be sitting in jail for months and months and months, and therefore there is a very evil interaction of prosecutorial power with poverty, with indigence."

It is very sad that the Supreme Court, which has been so anxious to protect various rights of persons who go to trial, has been so cowardly about seeing the evils of the plea bargaining process."

"...the Supreme Court has been indifferent to the pressures on accused in the plea bargaining process, as exemplified by the famous Alford case, where the fellow actually stood up and said, "I'm innocent, but I'm pleading because the disparity of outcome that they're threatening me with is too great". It's terribly sad."

"...the prosecutor is allowed to coerce people out of trial."

"...what happens is that prosecutors don't have to prove their cases; they're simply allowed to coerce people into waiving their rights. Judges are spared the difficulty of conducting trials and the danger of being found to have erred; they (plea bargains) can't be appealed from .."

"...what actually happens is you're coerced into confessing yourself guilty, whether you are or not."

"The saddest things about plea bargaining is that it is not widely understood. Most people have the television model of Perry Mason or somebody similar contesting for a verdict of a jury."

"Plea bargaining is sometimes justified on the ground that we are giving a lighter sentence to someone who is showing contrition or remorse for the offense. But that's a pack of lies. What is in fact happening is that the accused is being told by the prosecutor, "You accept guilt and confess and bear false witness against yourself and we will then see to it that it gets characterized as contrition or remorse."

The point is that the coercion, which eliminates trial, eliminates our ability to know you were in fact beyond reasonable doubt, guilty or not. And therefore it makes the remorse talk just window dressing by apologists who want to keep this existing system which is convenient for them."

Q: Do you have a solution?

I think the solution is very complex. I think it requires facing the underlying failure of this adversary criminal justice system. The idea that having one pack of lawyers and investigators saying, "You did it," and another pack saying, "We didn't," and nobody actually looking for what actually happened, nobody having an interest in investigating the truth, is a bit mistake."

"No knowledgeable student of comparative criminal justice is likely to fall victim to the notion that our is an admirable system.

It is an appalling system.

We have ten times as large a percent of our population locked up in jail by comparison with the European countries. We have sentences which are draconian. We've just had a 12 year old put in jail for life in Florida. Things of this sort are unheard of in the rest of the world.

There are many causes, but the failure of our adversary system is central, and the political nature of our prosecutorial system is also central..."

(complete interview at: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/plea/interviews/langbein.html)

Liberty and Justice for All: AZ Freedom March 2010.

Staggering into the morning from a two-week period of fevers, fatigue, and altered consciousness - punctuated by the grief of traumatized families - I found myself at the Freedom March for the Wrongfully Convicted on the State House lawn Saturday. It was organized by Camille Tilley, Courtney Bisbee's mom. As detailed by Stephen Lemons in the Phoenix New Times, Courtney was a school nurse and single mom when she was falsely accused of touching a teenaged boy and sentenced to 11 years in prison as a child molester. Sensationalized by the press, Courtney was convicted and condemned before she even went to trial.

Camille and Tom Tilley, 2008.

Now, six or seven years later, Courtney's still fighting for her child and her freedom from behind bars. The evidence exonerating her has been in the hands of the Maricopa County Attorney's office for over 4 years now. Andrew Thomas just sat on it. We're waiting to see if Rick Romley picks her file up before he goes. He had the courage to drop capital murder charges against Lisa Randall, the babysitter the county worked two years on prosecuting for the death of a child who was in her care, so we're hopeful.

Camille is an extraordinary woman. She sees the bigger picture - the contexts in which her family has been repeatedly victimized by agents of the state - and goes after every piece of it she can get her teeth into: not just abuses of prosecutorial discretion, but also minimum mandatory sentencing, police brutality, conditions of confinement and medical neglect in the prisons, racial profiling, and early release provisions for non-violent offenders. The devastating events of recent weeks, the rapid rise in the prisoner death toll, and the timing of the Freedom March this year brought a new constituency under her wing: the families of people prosecuted for the symptoms of their mental illnesses.

I've spent much of my adult life studying crime, punishment, and serious mental illness in an effort to keep my own loved one out of prison. I successfully convinced a handful of judges and prosecutors across the country to drop charges against him drawing on my research into the trans-institutionalization of the mentally ill, particularly those dually diagnosed with psychiatric and substance abuse disorders. I kept a few of my homeless clients out of jail that way, too. My experience has been that most people working in the criminal justice system agree that most of the seriously mentally ill whose lives are being chewed up there don't belong in jail or prison, they need housing, community support services and access to psychiatric hospitals. Instead, unfortunately, the seriously mentally ill are three times more likely to be incarcerated than hospitalized.

Shannon Palmer is one of the most stark examples of the damage done to a person's life by wrongful prosecution and incarceration that I've ever seen, but "justice" destroys innocent lives every day. According to Camille's research (based, I believe, on exonerations in death penalty cases), up to 10% of people in prison may be wrongfully convicted; factually innocent. If you look at prosecutions such as Shannon's, sentences of imprisonment for women like Lasasha Cherry, and Tony Lester's prosecution and sentence, then the number of people we have in prison who really shouldn't be there increases dramatically.

As of August 2010, the Arizona Department of Corrections estimates than about 9,362 of their 40,204 prisoners - about 25% - need on-going mental health treatment. Many of those individuals were too incompetent to stand trial or even to plead guilty when first arraigned - how can we then hold them fully culpable for criminal intent and send them to prison? They also estimate that 75% of offenders enter the system with major substance abuse issues. It's a serious and common error to believe that the mentally ill and addicted are getting the treatment they need in a safe environment when incarcerated. They are the most vulnerable to trauma, abuse and exploitation, which most have endured enough of already.

Most of us fail to appreciate the huge chunk we take out of people's lives when we criminalize and incarcerate them, and what lasting repercussions there are. We take it for granted that our system is just. American justice is not designed to expedite the exoneration and liberation of the innocent or even to equalize the punishment of the guilty. Once you plead guilty or are convicted, it's damn near impossible to get out through the appeals system, and no matter how innocent you are, it's all too easy to be violated on probation or parole - Arizona couldn't keep the prisons full otherwise.


There are people still trying to clear their names who have long since done their time - time they never should have had to do. Many have lost their careers, homes and families in the process of being branded a criminal. And some, like Shannon Palmer and Tony Lester, have lost their lives to our way of dealing with crime and doling out punishment.

What really astonished me - everyone, perhaps - at Saturday's Freedom March was how well one of our state legislators, Cecil Ash, articulated all that and more. Representative Ash is the chair of the House Study Committee on Sentencing Reform and Co-Chair of the House Judiciary Committee. He not only spoke to the issues we've been dealing with, he sat and listened to every single story, in 100 degree heat, until 2:15 in the afternoon. He even took notes as families were talking about their experiences. And as far as I could tell, of all our state lawmakers, he was the only one to bother to come.

AZ Representative Cecil Ash,
Freedom March Phoenix, 2010.

You could tell by the way he talked about his letters from Arizona's prisoners that Representative Ash not only reads them, he's sincerely troubled by their predicaments and has been thinking about solutions. We incarcerate far too many non-violent offenders, and he wants to reduce time served before parole eligibility for some from 85% of their sentence to 65% of their sentence. He wants to rewrite some of the minimum mandatory sentencing guidelines to give judges more flexibility when they encounter defendants in exceptional circumstances.


Because of Brewer and Bill Macumber, Ash also wants a constitutional change to remove the power of clemency from the hands of the governor and invest it solely in a non-partisan board. And he wants to see prison reform so that people aren't needlessly suffering and dying while serving their time, regardless of their crime (or lack of one). Those are just a few of the changes he touched on wanting to raise the next legislative session.

Julie Acklin, Freedom March 2010, Phoenix.

While Representative Ash is our knight in shining armor, he wasn't the star of the show. The stars were the ordinary citizens who stood up to tell their stories and share their grief. Julie Acklin talked about her son Davon, sick in prison with Hep C and not getting treatment. She hopes his fight brings relief to all prisoners infected with HCV. We're planning to hit the lawn at CASS shelter this week to collect signature for the petition to the clemency board and educate people about Hep C.

Patti Jones brought nephew Tony Lester's daughter, just turning 1 that day, and told of his love for his family, the torment of his first psychotic break, his prosecution in the wake of a suicide attempt, and his death after being taken off his meds just a few weeks into a devastating 12-year prison term. Probably 20 of his relatives were there wearing t-shirts in his memory; they converted a table into a memorial with pictures and balloons. Patti pledged to organize with other families to push sentencing and prison reform to prevent what happened to Tony, trading numbers with Julie.

one of Tony Lester's little loved ones.

Other individuals and family members spoke eloquently and passionately about their disillusioning experiences with the criminal justice system in Arizona as well. There was considerable emphasis on mandatory minimum sentences and enhancements, abusive prosecution and the coercion involved in plea bargaining, and the non-incarceration consequences of being criminalized - including stigma, child custody issues, and the challenges that probation and parole stipulations present even to innocent people.

Allison Hicks ("Backspin") talked about her time in the Maricopa County Jail and her ordeal with wrongful prosecution, about which she has written and will soon have a movie. The Arizona Death Penalty Forum gave a brief presentation, and some of Jim Rix' books, Jingle Jangle, about AZ death row exoneree Ray Krone were on hand. Daniel Horne was with us in spirit - his books about Maricopa County corruption were distributed, and he sent an extensive handout for folks, which I hope to touch on in another post.

We also celebrated the success of our extensive efforts to get Andrew Thomas out of the Maricopa County Attorney's office and keep him from becoming AZ attorney general. He was huge obstruction of justice there. According to Camille, his office is responsible for over 200,000 convictions. If 10% of them are innocent, that's a long trail of beaten families and damaged lives he left in his wake, with no sign of remorse or concern. We will be expecting more out of Mr. Montgomery - who is reportedly sympathetic towards people with mental illness - assuming he takes office after Romley's term expires. Hopefully Arizonans will never again have to tolerate someone like Andrew Thomas in a position of such power again.

Thanks, Camille, for all you did to put together the day - and for all you do year round for prisoners and their families.

And thank you, Representative Ash. You give us hope that our government is not completely lost, and that our loved ones have not been permanently discarded.





.

Dear Governor Brewer: Please deport prisoner Tripati.

The email below came to me this week from the family of Mr. Tripati, a prisoner I've been corresponding with for the past number of months. I've tried direct advocacy on some of these issues with the ADC to no avail. It troubles me greatly to receive this, and I don't know what else to do but write to the rest of you about it, hoping someone else has some ideas of how to help.

I'd be worried by this news anyway, but Anant hasn't answered the last few notes I sent him. I thought they threw him back in the hole for threatening to publish what he has on them (that was the last thing he wrote to me about) - or that maybe they were intercepting our mail or keeping him from writing to me anymore because I was giving them a hard time (his family is buried in debt and he's penniless in prison, but the ADC insisted to the courts that he has money, so he lost his indigent status - all I asked corporate counsel for was to investigate Mrs. Tripati's claim that her husband is indeed indigent, and that she is now disabled and can't work. I was blown off.).

Really, not only have I kept this stuff out of my blogs since January, but I was also very civil to both Director Ryan and his attorney, considering that his family has reason to believe that the ADC is deliberately trying to kill him. They have no reason to think they aren't, anyway, given all they've put the guy through. I thought that particular accusation was extreme, myself (and not productive) - why kill him when they can just bury him in that place? I'm not so sure about that anymore, though - nor do I think torture is much less criminal than murder, especially when dragged out in confinement year after year.

I think Anant may have earned a bit of ire from some of those people by being such a vexatious litigant, but the ADC has done some pretty horrid things to him (and a lot of other folks - very little of what I've heard him allege is unique). The only way to make prisons stop hurting people sometimes is to sue them yourself because no one else will - Anant has done so on numerous occasions. I've heard from other sources that the ADC routinely steals and destroys prisoner's evidence against them (including responses to grievances) so they can't successfully challenge them in court. And health care is atrocious; everyone who's had to use it that I've spoken to agrees. So, I have a hard time having sympathy for the dear old ADC.

According to Anant, ADC employees also destroyed evidence he needed to prove that he's innocent of the crimes he was originally sent to prison for 17 years or so ago. He got 52 years (4 consecutive sentences out of one trial) for some bail bond scheme or something that he took to trial and lost - that's more than most rapists and murders get, and he was convicted of non-violent crimes. That just seems wrong; it's clearly vindictive. It might as well have been life without parole - he'll die in that place if he can't get exonerated or pardoned or even thrown out of the country (Anant's a UK citizen who was so harshly sentenced at such extraordinary expense to the citizens of this great state for accusing the prosecution and judge of racism and corruption).

Anant Tripati

Even if Anant was guilty, 17 years is long enough - why can't we just deport him before his sentence is up? Why keep shelling out $25,000/year on him after all this time (oh, a lot more than that, once you add up the medical and legal stuff)? Send him back to Fiji - make the UK support him in his infirmity and old age. Just seven months ago the governor and legislature couldn't wait to get rid of illegal aliens crowding the prisons - so they ordered the ADC to turn hundreds of them over to ICE before their sentences were up, as long as they were in on non-violent crimes - there was special legislation for that purpose. No other prisoners were released early - not even the sick and dying citizens we have locked away (it was to save money and get rid of Mexican nationals, not to demonstrate mercy or compassion. God forbid we show any of that in Arizona).

Gene Greeley's claim that Anant's prison medical record has been lost is literally unbelievable, especially coming from him (he's the health services administrator at ASPC-Tucson, I believe). Every time I hear that man's name it's in the context of a prisoner being neglected, abused, or lied to (feel free to contact me if you have something good to say about his treatment of prisoners or families, though, and I'll mention it). I think Greeley knows exactly where those records are - his memo to Anant confirming that they were lost lost sarcastically asks him to let him know if he has any idea where they could be (Anant sent the note to me, and I've seen Greeley's signature before). What was the point of making that remark if not to mock him? Prisoners aren't even allowed to see their own medical records, much less handle them. If Anant can't walk out of there with all the effort he's put into being exonerated, how is his medical record supposed to just walk out of there, if not without the assistance of Mr. Greeley and his loyal henchmen?

Mrs. Tripati and her daughter have appealed to the Governor's office more than once in the past year about Anant's medical care, his dietary needs, and the ADC's retaliatory treatment of him. Ryan is Brewer's top cop, though, hand-picked for the job, groomed by years of working for Stewart (here) and the Bush administration (supervising Iraqi prisons): I don't think she's about to can him over a criminal alien's medical needs. We can't even get health care out of her for all the children in this state, much less the sickest prisoners. I doubt Brewer even reads these letters - I suspect her office sends everything from Anant's family straight over to Ryan's office with a note saying "deal with it," so they stop bugging her.

You folks keep right on bugging her. Hold her responsible. I will too - as will my comrade Brian at Operation-Nation, I'm sure (check out his blog - he has a great piece this week on the MCSO being taken over by the feds because of the Arpaio investigation). The governor won't want to help, but she won't get away anymore with quietly ignoring them until Anant dies (or she gets voted out of office). She certainly can't claim ignorance now that another letter is public: and I have a bigger audience than I did six months ago (including the DOJ). If her staff doesn't tell her what's going on, this is going to turn around and bite her before election day -and she won't even see it coming.

So, heads up, Governor Brewer: here we are. You might want to read what Mr. Tripati's daughter has to say; his wife is probably too ill from the stress and trauma of his deterioration and prolonged incarceration (as well as all of his ancillary expenses) to keep knocking on your door herself. At the very least, you should tell the ADC that man's family reports that they are impoverished and to re-evaluate their assertion that he isn't indigent: Ryan must know that his department's claim on that account is BS. That's just downright dirty pool. They're trying to keep him out of court, but I don't know if he can even buy stamps, much less pay for special dietary and medical supplies and MD co-pays if he's not afforded indigent status.

Mr. Tripati is not just Charles Ryan's prisoner, Governor Brewer: he's yours. His family is your prisoner too, so long as they aren't free to get help for him; they can't even pay an attorney anymore to fight for his medical treatment - which appears to be part of the ADC's agenda. Please take responsibility for assuring his safety and welfare as long as he is in your care and respond to his family's desperate appeal to you for help. You could do anything from order that he be evaluated by proper specialists, to setting in motion a pardon and deportation. We will all be awaiting your reply.

--------------------------------------

From: Aradhna Tripati
Date: Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 5:28 AM
Subject: Matter Requiring Immediate Attention
To: Jan Brewer

Dear Governor Brewer,

On July 3, 2010 at approximately 6:15 am, my father Anant Kumar Tripati (ADOC 102081) collapsed. Specifically, he could not speak and had slurred speech. He could not stretch his arms and open his fist as his fingers were twisted. His color changed and he was sweating. Timely actions by nurses, including providing him with oxygen, reduced damage. These symptoms, according to medical experts we consulted by telephone in Cambridge, could indicate mild stroke. However, this could not be confirmed because of the absence of further examinations by appropriate specialists including a neurological specialist.

On July 1, 2010, my father was informed he may have kidney problems which according to experts may be due to not having regular meals and meals of poor quality. He has been in an ongoing dispute with prison staff who have repeatedly lost his medical records, prevented him from receiving appropriate medical treatment, and refused to maintain a medically prescribed diet.

It is clear that my father is in poor health and these health problems are being severely exacerbated by a failure by ADOC prison staff to provide consistent medical care. Indeed he appears to have been targeted by vindictive actions to deliberately withold a his medically ordered special diet due to a dispute with Officer Gene Greeley.

Due to his ill health, it is clear that he is in danger of loosing his life if not provided with an adequate medical treatment and diet. His family do intend to hold ADOC liable for these failures in the event of any avoidable fatality, and have extensive documentary evidence detailing the withdrawal of his medically prescribed special diet and the refusal of the prison to restore it over the past year.

I ask you to simply investigate fully the actions of prison staff and to ensure that this inmate receives appropriate care. It hardly seems constructive for the AZDOC to refuse to take this seriously, as they have done in response to past complaints, both from the point of view of providing basic medical care to inmates but also for unnecessarily exposing itself to criminal liability. Given his poor state of health, I also request that you consider releasing him to his family on compassionate grounds so that we can take care of him.

Regards,

Aradhna Tripati

MEChA de ASU Solidarity With Mississippi Youth

Here's some cross-movement organizing for you. A few of us got together yesterday and came up with this sign, then I stopped by the MEChA de ASU meeting and told them what was up, so a bunch of them signed to support the youth and church groups, mainly, working to free the Scott Sisters.

We know this is all about civil rights and justice, not just about seeking mercy.

I'll be down at the Palestinian Wall memorial on Hayden Lawn today seeking support, too.

Hang in there, Mrs. Rasco. All of you. We've still got a long haul ahead, I think, but there's a lot of love and outrage stirring on the Scott Sisters behalf. This is America, after all. This kind of thing should be fixed when it happens here, not re-written for history books...who are we, if we can't be real?

Good for the media covering this now, by the way - the first ones show the most courage.






This is a close-up of the insert to Nina Simone's Anthology. Great tunes. Seemed appropriate to tack on there, since I've been listening a lot.

Still recruiting more Mississippi Prison Watchers!

- Peggy Plews

Ohio Learns the Lessons of Wrongful Conviction

When will Arizona?

From: Change.org
By Matt Kelly
March 20, 2010

The Ohio House of Representatives this week passed sweeping reforms addressing the causes of wrongful conviction, setting a new standard for other states to follow in preventing this unimaginable -- but very real -- injustice.

The bill addresses evidence preservation, eyewitness identification procedures, recording of interrogations and improved access to DNA testing. It gained momentum in the wake of a groundbreaking series in the Columbus Dispatch highlighting cases of Ohio prisoners unable to obtain DNA tests that could prove them innocent.

SB 77 passed both chambers of the Ohio legislature with near-unanimous bipartisan support, and Gov. Ted Strickland is expected to sign it into law with a few days.

Ohio Rep. Tyrone Yates, who sponsored the bill in the House, called this bill "one of the most important pieces of criminal justice legislation in this state in a century.”
# The bill puts Ohio out ahead of many other states on four major reforms to prevent wrongful convictions and overturn injustice, including: Requiring the preservation of DNA evidence in serious crimes (such as homicide and sexual assault), because post-conviction reviews can't be conducted when evidence has been tossed.

# Improving lineup procedures to significantly reduce the chance of misidentification, the leading cause of wrongful conviction.

# Incentivizing police departments to recording interrogations, a safeguard that prevents false confessions and a technique that helps law enforcement agencies conduct more efficient investigations

# Allowing parolees to apply for DNA testing in cases where it could potentially prove their innocence.

The Dispatch series that helped bring about these reforms has also led to two DNA exonerations so far, and other cases are in testing. The Innocence Network announced this week that the series' two lead reporters, Mike Wagner and Geoff Dutton, will be given the group's first annual Investigative Journalism Award in April.

With this bill, Ohio moves to the forefront on smart reforms to prevent injustice and improve efficiency in law enforcement and in courts. No one wants the innocent to go to prison. Wrongful convictions destroy lives and communities and leave the real perpetrators of crime on the streets. Kudos to Ohio for learning the lessons of injustice and making these critical changes.

see http://ohioprisonwatch.blogspot.com for more.

Scott Watch: International Day for Abolition and Blogging for Freedom.

I've been MIA, folks. Actually, I'm still in action - just otherwise occupied with things off-line. Blogging from Conspire today since my internet has been down since Monday morning. The folks here are pretty decent (it's an anarchist hangout). I may well be here tomorrow, too, blogging for the Scotts, now that I'm back.

FYI (more on this later) - tomorrow is also the "International Day for the Commemoration of the Abolition of the Transatlantic Slave Trade" (that's just a little history). Since there are direct links between plantations and prisons, the end of slavery and the enslavement of prisoners in America , Jim Crow and felon dis-enfranchisement laws, and the institution of slavery and persistent racial and economic inequalities, it seems appropriate to blog that day for the Scott Sisters - as well as for the awesome women who have been anchoring this campaign, including their Mom, Mrs. Rasco.

So, remember the day, tomorrow, in honor of those who have passed in the streets, in shelters, and in prison while fighting for human liberation, and out of respect and gratitude for those who fight on with everything to lose - including those who end up in our prisons on this journey...disproportionately the poor and people of color, ironically.

That's got be something like being drafted into the Vietnam War. You go or they take you, and you don't get back home until they're done with your body; no guarantees you'll still be alive. We need to be watching prisoners' backs more closely, now, addressing their and their families' trauma, and getting them out as soon as we can.

--------------------------

SPREAD THE WORD & DON'T BE MIA FOR THE 3/25 DAY OF BLOGGING FOR THE SCOTT SISTERS - ALL PARTICIPATING BLOGS WILL BE LISTED AT http://www.facebook.com/l/7f874;www.freethescottsisters.blogspot.com

**SPECIAL SNEAK PREVIEW**

Sis. Terry Howcott answers this call as only she can, please check out "SCOTT SISTERS ARE US" right now at http://www.facebook.com/l/7f874;terryhowcott.com/greenspace.asp?id=1296
and be inspired!!

Please send your blog URL's to nattyreb@gmail.com so that they can be acknowledged,
help to make the Scott Sisters case one that no one can say they've not heard of, together we can save the life of Jamie Scott and free she and Gladys from their 16 years in that prison hellhole!!
----------------------------------

PLEASE PARTICIPATE AND SPREAD THE WORD!
3/25 DAY OF BLOGGING FOR THE SCOTT SISTERS

Thanks to the many excellent bloggers who participated in our initial Day of Blogging for the Scott Sisters on 3/18!! The notices didn't reach everyone in a timely manner and so we are happy to announce a new date for bloggers to unite around this case of Mississippi injustice and particularly to intervene in the prison's medical malpractice being suffered by Jamie Scott!

In early January both of Jamie Scott's kidneys shut down and she has been swiftly declining due to unprofessional medical care that is inadequate, cut-rate and frighteningly inept. Jamie was rushed to the hospital last week due to severe infection
and the need for prolonged medical attention. However, Jamie continues to require ongoing close monitoring as when she is returned to the prison it is well documented that the medical staff there has provided abysmal health care in filthy conditions that have put Jamie's life at risk far too many times to be acceptable. Jamie needs to be released from prison, period!

We ask that bloggers put out calls for students, clubs, churches/temples/mosques, organizations, creative artists, media, politicians, community leaders, journalists, etc. to
become aware of the case of the Scott Sisters and to make certain that all of their contacts are informed, as well. There is something that each person can do and we need to get Jamie home while she still has time to be with her family!

Thanks to all who will participate in this and help to raise the call to FREE THE SCOTT SISTERS throughout the blogosphere 3/25 and beyond! In the spirit of International Women's Month, please support our women! Please send notification of any blog postings to nattyreb@gmail.com!
----------------------

In conjunction with: http://www.facebook.com/l/7f874;www.blackperspective.net

For Immediate Release Afrosphere Action Coalition – March 22, 2010

Contact: Marpessa Kupendua of the Committee to Free the Scott Sisters at nattyreb@gmail.com

Wrongly Convicted In Dire Health Situation
3/25 DAY OF BLOGGING FOR THE SCOTT SISTERS

On 12/24/93, the Scott County Sheriff’s Department arrested Jamie and Gladys Scott for armed robbery even though three young males, ranging from ages 14 to 18, confessed to committing the crime and the women have unwaveringly maintained their complete innocence. Despite this, the corrupt Mississippi sheriff used coercion, threats, and harassment to compel the young men to turn state’s evidence against the Scott Sisters due to a long-standing vendetta against a family member. In 10/94 the Scott Sisters were sentenced to extraordinary double-life terms each, despite the facts that no one was harmed, neither sister had prior convictions, no weapon was ever recovered, and the amount alleged to have been taken was approximately $11.00. Even if they were guilty as charged, this sentence is completely outrageous and cruel.

Jamie Scott, who entered the prison system as a healthy young woman, is now suffering from complete kidney failure and other life-threatening medical conditions. Since January, 2010 Jamie has endured almost weekly severe health setbacks that the state has either outright refused to address or handled in a slipshod manner. Jamie has had weeks of serious infections that could have taken her life, has gone into shock, been given sporadic dialysis treatments, and suffered the state's refusal to provide her with adequate nutrition as required for her serious medical condition.

The Scott Sisters are now in their 16th year of incarceration and their five children and grandchildren are being raised by their now ailing mother. The defendants and their family are wholly dependent on support from the press, organizations, and all those dedicated to justice in making this debacle as public as possible. The lengthy incarceration of these women to date and their draconian sentences are completely shocking and must be challenged, enough is enough!

Mrs. Rasco and Afrosphere Bloggers are calling on the public to press the governor's office to pardon the Scott Sisters and release them, particularly Jamie who needs to be at home with her family during her very serious illness. Please ask that the media and politicians do an investigative inquiry about this tragic situation and the outrageous case of the wrongfully convicted Scott Sisters!

Innocent but Dead: Wrongful Execution.

In Solidarity with our Imprisoned Sisters Around the World.
Celebrating Women's History and Resistance!
March 2010.

This is a few months old, but seemed appropriate next to the post I put up earlier. The ramifications of wrongful convictions can be devastating, and ordinary people just aren't well-enough protected from the brutal vengeance we seem collectively compelled to impose on the "guilty" at almost any cost...

---------------------------

Innocent but Dead

By BOB HERBERT

September 1, 2009

New York Times
Op-Ed Columnist

There is a long and remarkable article in the current New Yorker about a man who was executed in Texas in 2004 for deliberately setting a fire that killed his three small children. Rigorous scientific analysis has since shown that there was no evidence that the fire in a one-story, wood frame house in Corsicana was the result of arson, as the authorities had alleged.

In other words, it was an accident. No crime had occurred.

Cameron Todd Willingham, who refused to accept a guilty plea that would have spared his life, and who insisted until his last painful breath that he was innocent, had in fact been telling the truth all along.

It was inevitable that some case in which a clearly innocent person had been put to death would come to light. It was far from inevitable that this case would be the one. “I was extremely skeptical in the beginning,” said the New Yorker reporter, David Grann, who began investigating the case last December.

The fire broke out on the morning of Dec. 23, 1991. Willingham was awakened by the cries of his 2-year-old daughter, Amber. Also in the house were his year-old twin girls, Karmon and Kameron. The family was poor, and Willingham’s wife, Stacy, had gone out to pick up a Christmas present for the children from the Salvation Army.

Willingham said he tried to rescue the kids but was driven back by smoke and flames. At one point his hair caught fire. As the heat intensified, the windows of the children’s room exploded and flames leapt out. Willingham, who was 23 at the time, had to be restrained and eventually handcuffed as he tried again to get into the room.

There was no reason to believe at first that the fire was anything other than a horrible accident. But fire investigators, moving slowly through the ruined house, began seeing things (not unlike someone viewing a Rorschach pattern) that they interpreted as evidence of arson.

They noticed deep charring at the base of some of the walls and patterns of soot that made them suspicious. They noticed what they felt were ominous fracture patterns in pieces of broken window glass. They had no motive, but they were convinced the fire had been set. And if it had been set, who else but Willingham would have set it?

With no real motive in sight, the local district attorney, Pat Batchelor, was quoted as saying, “The children were interfering with his beer drinking and dart throwing.”

Willingham was arrested and charged with capital murder.

When official suspicion fell on Willingham, eyewitness testimony began to change. Whereas initially he was described by neighbors as screaming and hysterical — “My babies are burning up!” — and desperate to have the children saved, he now was described as behaving oddly, and not having made enough of an effort to get to the girls.

And you could almost have guaranteed that a jailhouse snitch would emerge. They almost always do. This time his name was Johnny Webb, a jumpy individual with a lengthy arrest record who would later admit to being “mentally impaired” and on medication, and who had started taking illegal drugs at the age of 9.

The jury took barely an hour to return a guilty verdict, and Willingham was sentenced to death.

He remained on death row for 12 years, but it was only in the weeks leading up to his execution that convincing scientific evidence of his innocence began to emerge. A renowned scientist and arson investigator, Gerald Hurst, educated at Cambridge and widely recognized as a brilliant chemist, reviewed the evidence in the Willingham case and began systematically knocking down every indication of arson.

The authorities were unmoved. Willingham was executed by lethal injection on Feb. 17, 2004.

Now comes a report on the case from another noted scientist, Craig Beyler, who was hired by a special commission, established by the state of Texas to investigate errors and misconduct in the handling of forensic evidence.

The report is devastating, the kind of disclosure that should send a tremor through one’s conscience. There was absolutely no scientific basis for determining that the fire was arson, said Beyler. No basis at all. He added that the state fire marshal who investigated the case and testified against Willingham “seems to be wholly without any realistic understanding of fires.” He said the marshal’s approach seemed to lack “rational reasoning” and he likened it to the practices “of mystics or psychics.”

Grann told me on Monday that when he recently informed the jailhouse snitch, Johnny Webb, that new scientific evidence would show that the fire wasn’t arson and that an innocent man had been killed, Webb seemed taken aback. “Nothing can save me now,” he said.

Hold DAs Accountable for Abusive Prosecutions, Wrongful Convictions.

In Solidarity with our Imprisoned Sisters Around the World.
Celebrating Women's History and Resistance!
March 2010.

I certainly hope the AZ House Sentencing Study Committee takes a look at this issue and recommends legislation assuring that we're all protected from wrongful convictions and abusive prosecutions, especially in Maricopa County. Prosecutors everywhere seem more invested in ease of conviction than actual guilt of the accused, and bully even the innocent into plea bargains that send them to prison by punishing people who resist them with the equivalent of life sentences for economic crimes like fraud and writing bad checks.

Unfortunately, AZ judges are also seemingly numb to the inhumanity of incarceration - they tear apart lives and families all too readily. Not enough of them know what it's like to be taken prisoner and held under threat of death if they resist, to lose their kids when wrongfully convicted of a sex crime, or to be raped while being detained in the custody of the state. If they did, we'd have half the number of people in prison as we do now - and a lot fewer kids suffering from their parent's punishment through their forced absence and economic incapacitation.

Anyway, more DA's are finally stepping up to look at innocence claims and exonerations. We can't rely on all of them to be noble and honest, though. In light of the way Thomas has handled (or refused to handle) wrongful convictions in Maricopa County - and appears to go after his political enemies with the weapons of his office - someone other than the original prosecutor and judge should be monitoring for wrongful convictions and abusive prosecutions and sentences.

We need to start making this one of the most "talked-about issues" of the campaign for Attorney General and Maricopa Co. Attorney's Office - even the governor's race, since Goddard should be more on the ball with these himself.

------------------

Prosecutor in Manhattan Will Monitor Convictions

New York Times
March 4, 2010

The Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., announced Thursday that he would start a program to safeguard against wrongful convictions, addressing one of the most talked-about topics during his campaign for the office.

Known as the Conviction Integrity Program, the effort will be led by Bonnie Sard, a veteran assistant district attorney, who will monitor cases that raise red flags and oversee investigations. The program will also include a panel of 10 of Mr. Vance’s top assistants to review cases and the office’s prosecutorial practices, as well as a panel of outside experts to advise on policy.

While Mr. Vance said he believed the office had long tried to make sure that it did not make mistakes, he said a structured system would take the approach one step further.

“I think this will help lawyers do better what they already were doing, and with more consistency,” Mr. Vance said in an interview.

It is nothing new for prosecutors to vet their own convictions and to question their investigations, said Joshua Marquis, the district attorney in Astoria, Ore., and a member of the board of the National District Attorneys Association. But establishing a specific unit in a district attorney’s office to examine convictions is an emerging trend, Mr. Marquis said, adding that the Manhattan office faced unique challenges because of its size. The office has about 400 assistant district attorneys.

“The worst nightmare of a prosecutor is not losing a case; it’s convicting an innocent person,” Mr. Marquis said. “I think a prosecutor’s always got to be willing to look back and say, ‘Hey, did we do the right thing?’ ”

Ms. Sard and both panels are expected to come up with additional training procedures to pass on to all assistants in the office, Mr. Vance said.

The Manhattan district attorney’s office has not always had a reputation for admitting its faults. In one instance, a former assistant district attorney, Daniel L. Bibb, said his bosses had urged him to defend the convictions in the 1990 Palladium nightclub shooting at a hearing, even though he believed that the two defendants were not guilty.

But Mr. Vance, who became the district attorney this year, said he believed he was setting a tone.

“Young assistants who have issues know they can raise those issues,” he said. “There is no downside. There is only an upside to raising a concern.”

Prosecuting Innocence: Resistance is Futile

Borrowed this post from our friends at Idaho Prison Watch...

The sentencing committee meeting was canceled again today, by the way - I have no idea when it's rescheduled for. I hung out at the Capitol awhile anyway, handing out copies of Tenacious to the women legislators I could find, since it was "Women's Day at the Legislature" today, and I didn't think they'd made any arrangements for state prisoners to participate or talk to their legislators. I also left one for Governor Brewer, with an article done by a woman who had cancer while at Perryville a few years back. She's now with an organization that helps women in prison. I'll post her story here when I get permission.


I hope those legislators I gave the zines to actually bother to read them. I don't know when or how they're going to hear a woman prisoner's voice address their conditions otherwise. Maybe we should try to get them to hold hearings out at the prisons themselves. Given the Arizona Republic and Lumley Vampire reports on the physical condition of the facilities alone, they should have organized an emergency oversight committee to check it out in person. The legislature is responsible, after all, for compromising the safety of state prisoners and corrections employees in the first place. They've now been duly warned that they'll be held liable for failing to follow up on it.

Anyway, the following article is very pertinent to the work of the House Sentencing Committee - and most of the issues I have with Andrew Thomas' office. In fact, this is a very good reason why we don't want that man to be Attorney General. He'll be putting ten times as many innocent people away, while letting the really guilty ones walk by making questionable deals - like the one that put the Scott Sisters away. The innocent don't have anything to fear, they think, nor do they have anything to trade. The guilty, on the other hand -  the "triggermen" - can trade them. 

There's nothing guaranteed to get you a more severe punishment in America than insisting that you're innocent and losing to the prosecutor at trial - and they make sure you know that when they make their offer. Their job is to prove guilt, not to find truth - don't make any mistakes about that. They're out to get convictions, by and large - not to protect the innocent. Victims are just useful tools to win their cases with, and to use to promote their own tough-on-crime image.

There are a few remarkable exceptions to that rule, of course. Some DA's have been very committed to investigating reports of wrongful prosecutions/convictions. I hope that's the beginning of a trend towards more ethical, responsible prosecutorial conduct. I have yet to see evidence of that happening in Arizona, though.

-------------

What is Wrong with the Plea Bargain System in our Courts Today?

Frontline Interview with
John H. Langbein

John Langbein is a professor of law and legal history at Yale Law School. In this interview, he describes how the plea bargain system pressures people to buckle and accept a plea-even if they are innocent-and how prosecutors, judges and defense attorneys have a role, a stake even, in seeing that this happens. He also talks about the Supreme Court's indifference to the pressures on a defendant in the plea process, and why he believes the rampant growth of pleas is rooted in the trial system's failures.

(I have condensed this interview for the sake of this forum. You can view the entire interview on the link I provided below)

Q: "What is wrong with the plea bargain system in our courts today?"

Plea bargaining is a system that is best described as one of condemnation without adjudication. It is a system that replaces trial, which is what our constitution intended, with deals.

Second, those deals are coerced. The prosecutor is basically forcing people to waive their rights to jury trial by threatening them with ever greater sanctions if they refuse to plead and instead demand the right to jury trial.
But every defendant has a right to go to trial; it's a choice they make to plead guilty.

The problem with choice arguments is that they neglect the main dynamic of plea bargan which is the pressure that the prosecutor puts on you to do it his way.

Plea bargain works by threat. What the prosecutor says to a criminal defendant in plea bargaining is, "Surrender your right to jury trial, or if you go to trial and are convicted of an offense, we will see to it that you are punished twice. Once for the offense, and once for having had the temerity to exercise your right to jury trial." THAT is a coercive system.

And the prosecutor has many devices which increase the level of coercion: multiplying the counts, threatening to recommend the most severe end of the sentence range, keeping you locked up in pretrial detention if you're poor - most people who are in the criminal justice system are poor - prosecuting your wife as well as yourself, and things of this sort. The prosecutor can pile it on if you don't play it his way. It is therefore a deeply coercive system. Yes, you have a choice, but your choice is constrained by coercion.

Q: What is the role of the defense lawyer?

Sometimes defense counsel does a very good job for people in the plea bargaining process, and gets you a good deal. But there are many other outcomes.

In the public defender system the defense counsel is representing a hundred other people; the defense counsel can not take every case to trial....

Defense counsel in some circumstances is not very competent and is delighted simply to take his money and run, so to speak."

"So there's no particular reason to think that defense counsel is any serious answer to the intrinsically coercive nature of plea bargaining."

Q: Whom does the system benefit?

The main winner in the plea bargaining process is the prosecutor. I describe plea bargaining as a system of prosecutorial tyranny..."

What has happened is that a single officer, the prosecutor, now is in charge of investigating, charging--that is, bringing formal charges--deciding whether to prosecute, evaluating that evidence, deciding whether or not in his or her judgment you're guilty or not, and then basically sentencing you.

"....what we have now is a system in which one officer, and indeed a somewhat dangerous officer, the prosecutor, has complete power over the fate of the criminal accused."

Q: You let the defense attorney off lightly.

I think defense counsel is to some extent at the mercy of a bad system. There's not a lot you can do when the other guy has all the chips. And the prosecutor has an awesome pile of chips in our plea bargaining system, because the prosecutor can threaten ever larger sanctions if you don't do what he wants.

So I believe that by far the worst failure in the plea bargaining system is the prosecutor, and I think that's in part because the prosecutor is not always as noble as he would like you to believe he is."

"It's a lot easier to coerce somebody into waiving all his defenses than to actually investigate the case thoroughly..."

But, again, the trial is there for anyone who chooses that option.

It is true that one always has the right to go to trial, but the prosecutor can make that right so costly that only a fool will exercise the right..."

Part of the reason why we in this country have criminal sentences that are so much more severe than in the rest of the civilized world, is the need that prosecutors have to threaten people with these huge sentences in order to get them to waive the right to jury trial...."

".... most people (in the system) are too poor to afford bail, and these people are particularly likely to yield to the demand that they confess whatever it is they're being charged with rather than wait for some kind of trial, because they'll be sitting in jail for months and months and months, and therefore there is a very evil interaction of prosecutorial power with poverty, with indigence."

It is very sad that the Supreme Court, which has been so anxious to protect various rights of persons who go to trial, has been so cowardly about seeing the evils of the plea bargaining process."

"...the Supreme Court has been indifferent to the pressures on accused in the plea bargaining process, as exemplified by the famous Alford case, where the fellow actually stood up and said, "I'm innocent, but I'm pleading because the disparity of outcome that they're threatening me with is too great". It's terribly sad."

"...the prosecutor is allowed to coerce people out of trial."

"...what happens is that prosecutors don't have to prove their cases; they're simply allowed to coerce people into waiving their rights. Judges are spared the difficulty of conducting trials and the danger of being found to have erred; they (plea bargains) can't be appealed from .."

"...what actually happens is you're coerced into confessing yourself guilty, whether you are or not."

"The saddest things about plea bargaining is that it is not widely understood. Most people have the television model of Perry Mason or somebody similar contesting for a verdict of a jury."

"Plea bargaining is sometimes justified on the ground that we are giving a lighter sentence to someone who is showing contrition or remorse for the offense. But that's a pack of lies. What is in fact happening is that the accused is being told by the prosecutor, "You accept guilt and confess and bear false witness against yourself and we will then see to it that it gets characterized as contrition or remorse."

The point is that the coercion, which eliminates trial, eliminates our ability to know you were in fact beyond reasonable doubt, guilty or not. And therefore it makes the remorse talk just window dressing by apologists who want to keep this existing system which is convenient for them."

Q: Do you have a solution?

I think the solution is very complex. I think it requires facing the underlying failure of this adversary criminal justice system. The idea that having one pack of lawyers and investigators saying, "You did it," and another pack saying, "We didn't," and nobody actually looking for what actually happened, nobody having an interest in investigating the truth, is a bit mistake."

"No knowledgeable student of comparative criminal justice is likely to fall victim to the notion that our is an admirable system.

It is an appalling system.

We have ten times as large a percent of our population locked up in jail by comparison with the European countries. We have sentences which are draconian. We've just had a 12 year old put in jail for life in Florida. Things of this sort are unheard of in the rest of the world.

There are many causes, but the failure of our adversary system is central, and the political nature of our prosecutorial system is also central..."

(complete interview at: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/plea/interviews/langbein.html)