Consumer Law

U.S Supreme Court to Decide: What Should Happen To Prosecutors Who Cook Evidence?

By Andy Hoffman

Riddle me this, civil justice fans: in a case of blatant misconduct by prosecutors that results in two innocent people going to jail for 25 years, should the prosecutors be immune from suit?

Back in 1977, in a small Iowa county whose County Attorney was up for re-election, a retired police captain working as a security guard was shot and killed.  The police, with the very active participation of prosecutors, decided to ignore the likely suspect (who happened to be white) and instead go after some kids (who happened to be black). They used both threats and enticements (including a $5000 reward) to get one of the kids, a 16-year-old, to blame two others - even though they didn?t do it.   The two were convicted of first-degree murder, spending the next 25 years in jail, until the Iowa Supreme Court overturned the convictions in 2003 (based on the prosecutors? misconduct).  And now they have filed suit against these prosecutors.

The law normally protects prosecutors from lawsuits, but not necessarily when their misconduct has to do with their investigating the case (as here) as opposed to just prosecuting the case. Since the courts are somewhat split about this, now the U.S. Supreme Court is going to decide.

Where the high court will eventually come down is anybody?s guess, but notably, the Des Moines Register has come out strongly in support of those filing the suit, stating:

In an age when convicted murderers are being released from death row based on new DNA evidence and when prior criminal convictions are being overturned because of clear prosecutorial misconduct - the most recent being that of former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens - it's time for the courts to reconsider a rule that gives total protection to prosecutors who abuse their powers.

Full post as published by ThePopTort on April 28, 2009 (boomark / email).