Punishing the Innocent: On Prosecutorial misconduct.

To those of you in Arizona who have a loved one you believe has been wrongfully accused or convicted, get in touch with Camille Tilley. Her daughter, Courtney Bisbee, has been fighting to prove her innocence and maintain some kind of connections with her daughter for over six years now, from her cell in Perryville state prison. Camille has organized with other families involve in the criminal justice system, worked on sentencing reform and prison reform legislation, and served as a resource to me on many occasions.

In the meantime, hit this site and read the petition for Courtney. The text was written by the witness to her "crime" who recanted. The family has been trying to get the Maricopa County Attorney's office to have her case re-opened in light of the new testimony, but neither Andrew Thomas (the one who prosecuted her), Rick Romley, or Bill Montgomery have done so. I realize that to do so may be to admit their office's own guilt or responsibility - leaving the county open for liability - but it's wrong for this woman and her child to be torn apart as they have been, and for so many innocent people in this thing to suffer any longer. Refusing to even allow the new evidence to have a hearing would only seem to perpetuate the prosecutorial misconduct that sent Courtney to prison in the first place.

More information and evidence can be found at http://www.justice4courtney.com/

Contact Camille through there as well.

In Arizona, the AZ Justice Project at ASU assists the wrongfully convicted with their legal cases. The application on this page must be completed by the prisoner themselves.

It's extremely selective, but here's their snail mail / contact information:

Arizona Justice Project
c/o Sandra Day O'Connor
College of Law
P.O. Box 875920
Tempe, AZ 85287-5920
Phone: (602) 258-1702
Email: info@azjusticeproject.org

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

Prosecutors Gone Wild: How Many Wrongful Convictions Will the Public Stand for?

Conrad Black; Huffington Post

January 6, 2012

Even casual samplers of the media now come across colossal injustices and failures in the U.S. justice criminal system every two weeks or so. Yet these stories, everyone a heart-breaking recitation of how willful prosecution misconduct has ruined a life or a family, with no consequences at all to whoever has abused his great powers as a prosecutor, seem never to elicit any particular public response or gain any traction for review or reform.

It is an achievement just to pierce the eagerness of most of the media to be a stentorian Hallelujah chorus for law and order paranoia.

The latest such incident is the lamentable affair in Texas in which Michael Morton was accused and convicted of murdering his wife, spent 25 years in prison, has been exonerated because of DNA evidence that was withheld from the trial by prosecutors, and another suspect has now been arrested and charged. Mistakes happen, are not rare, and provide one of the strongest arguments against the death penalty.

What makes this more worrisome than a sad story of a no-fault miscarriage of justice, are strong allegations that the prosecutors, Ken Anderson, now a state judge, and Mike Davis, deliberately sandbagged Morton by unlawfully withholding evidence.

It is alleged that Anderson withheld police notes that someone else committed the murder, did not provide the full police report, including evidence of activity on Mrs. Morton's credit card after Mr. Morton had been taken into custody; and that Anderson advised his successor as prosecutor "to oppose all of Mr. Morton's post-conviction motions for DNA testing."

Morton and his counsel have been assisted by the Innocence Foundation, which specializes in using DNA evidence to seek the exoneration of convicts. It and like-minded groups have sometimes been harassed by prosecutors and threatened with charges of obstructing justice. Innocence and Morton's own counsel claim that in this case Anderson disobeyed "a direct order from the trial court to produce the exculpatory police reports from the lead investigator," (a claim the investigator himself corroborates). Morton and his counsel have asked for a "court of inquiry" to determine whether Anderson and Davis should be charged criminally for abetting what they knew to be a false conviction.

For the purposes of determining wrongdoing, the Texas attorney general became the special prosecutor, and the spokesman for the attorney general declined to reply to questions about a possible conflict of interest. Anderson and Davis at first refused to give depositions or answer subpoenas, but when overwhelmed by decisions validating Morton's right to know more, Anderson said he felt "sick" about what had happened, but explained, as if it mitigated responsibility or the gravity of what occurred, that "prosecutors are under a lot of pressure to convict." Davis claimed to be only an "innocent bystander" between Morton and Anderson, an unusual posture for a prosecutor in his own case.

The issue is whether prosecutors are under any requirement at all to comply with defendants' constitutional rights to due process and a fair trial, or if there is no sanction at all for their violation of those rights. In a well-publicized Arkansas case last year, three men who had been in prison for 17 years, one on death row, for a murder for which they were ultimately exonerated, could only negotiate themselves to freedom by pleading guilty to a lesser offense for which they were released for time served. But by pre-arrangement, they recounted to the court that it was a false plea, that they were not guilty of anything, and that they were only going through this charade to restart their lives as free men as quickly as possible. The episode was reported almost without comment even in the liberal national media.

Prosecutors have practically untrammeled discretion in deciding what to charge, how many counts to allege, and a very wide latitude in sentences sought. Grand juries are just a rubber stamp for prosecutors, and contrary to the spirit of the Fifth Amendment, provide absolutely no assurance against capricious prosecution. But complicity in or direct causation of the lengthy incarceration of falsely accused and convicted people, not to be confused with honest error and misplaced zeal, is a terribly serious offense and is so treated in every other serious jurisdiction except the U.S.

The Brady Rule, enunciated by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1963, requires prosecutors to disclose evidence favorable to defendants. But failure to do so is rarely discovered and almost never punished when it is unearthed. In the infamous case of Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska, it was revealed that the prosecutors had withheld evidence that they knew to be exculpatory, causing the senator's conviction and narrow electoral defeat, before the whole case was blown up as unjust.

Yet the court-appointed inquiry did not recommend criminal proceedings against the prosecutors for professional misconduct because the trial judge had not told the prosecutors that they had to obey the law. This is utterly spurious, of course, but especially so as the transcript reveals that the prosecutors responded to a request from senator Stevens' defense team for a motion so ordering them, that it was unnecessary because they would of course not break the law. (The report expressed no opinion about charging the prosecutors with obstruction of justice.)

The legal profession in the United States is a professional cartel where legislating lawyers and regulators produce thousands of new enforceable laws and regulations every year; judges, prosecutors, and private sector counsel lock arms to ensure that legal invoices, (which total almost 10 per cent of GDP -- almost $1.4 trillion annually), are paid as a priority surpassed only by the claims of government.

Unlimited incidences of what other legally serious countries would consider frivolous or vexatious litigation clog the civil courts, and prosecutors enjoy a stacked evidentiary and procedural deck which gives them a success rate in prosecutions of over 90 per cent. (The corresponding figure in Canada is about 65 per cent, and only about 40 per cent of those receive custodial sentences.)

The United States has just five per cent of the world's population, 25 per cent of its incarcerated people, and 50 per cent of its lawyers. The U.S. Supreme Court is unvaryingly proud to try law and not fact, and is thus ostentatiously uninterested in a just result as such, in the unutterably irritating and desiccated way of people who profess indifference to the control they exercise over the fate of real people.

Last year, in the case of John Thompson, a man who spent 14 years on death row for a crime of which he was eventually exonerated, after a shocking sequence of prosecution acts of deceit, the Supreme Court conferred what amounted to an absolute immunity for prosecutors from civil recourse for their actions.
Justice Thomas, for the court majority, explained that the "attorney (including a prosecutor) who violates his or her ethical (obligations) is subject to professional discipline, including sanctions, suspension, and disbarment." The justice knows what a fatuous bit of dissembling this is, as the legal cartel locks arms to assist its members to escape responsibility for all but the most egregious crimes. (Justice Ginsburg's opinion for the dissenters was very cogent.)

In any other legally serious country, the Morton-like cases would incite public outrage. In the Morton case, Judge Sid Harle, in releasing Morton after 25 years of wrongful imprisonment caused by prosecution dishonesty, expressed his "sympathies" for Morton, but said his release proved that the United States "has the best justice system in the world."

In fact, it is a frequently evil and generally defective system that thrives on complacency. Republicans have even delayed Senator Jim Webb's proposal to establish a blue ribbon commission to review stratospheric American incarceration rates.

In the United States, even the staggering 48 million people with a "record" seem not to care. The media, in their lust to amplify the publicization of crime and incite paranoia, have brain-washed from public memory the ragged bourgeois, constitutional, heirloom of the presumption of innocence.

Next to the electoral accountability of government officials, the two greatest pillars of democratic civilization are the rule of law and a free press. By giving the press, in theNew York Times and Sullivan, an almost absolute immunity against defamation actions, and the prosecution service an almost absolute immunity from responsibility for its own lawlessness, the Supreme Court has detonated high explosives under the foundations of American civilization.

Needless to add, the justices enjoy life sinecures in their August offices, and have generally avoided the well-earned public contempt that now largely attaches to the Congress and most of the administration. The law is a very spavined ass, and the sooner the public realizes this and determines that something must be done about it, the better it will be for everyone.

Killing us softly: Prosecuting suicide.

I attended a community roundtable meeting last night about mental illness in the criminal justice system, and the issue of prosecuting people for suicide attempts came up. Killing oneself is no longer against the law in America, but it seems that doesn't stop the cops and prosecutors from coming after you if you fail. A woman in the audience noted that she had just helped get charges dismissed against a man who the City of Phoenix tried to prosecute for disorderly conduct over his attempt to jump off of a bridge after he recovered from the crisis. The city attorney's office complained that he disrupted traffic and tied up public services with his actions.


Isn't that what public services are for - to deal with that kind of thing? Arizona's suicide rate is twice our homicide rate, so we'd better come up with more creative ways to discourage people from killing themselves if we want to lower the death toll. This kind of prosecution seems aimed at minimizing the public's inconvenience, that's all.

Just a few months ago, at a similar meeting, I heard about a man in either Pima or Pinal county who was being prosecuted for criminal damage after surviving a suicide attempt in which he threw himself in front of a car. The damage to the vehicle was over $1000, so he was facing a felony - and therefore possible prison time.


What is wrong with this state? If a person dies from self-inflicted injury, they're listed as a suicide victim. If they survive, however, they can be prosecuted as a perpetrator. Granted, that guy's actions placed the occupants of the vehicle at risk and he should compensate them for the property damage. But that calls for restorative justice, not criminal justice interventions.

I know it's not just here. Last March, the ACLU filed a brief in Indiana on behalf of a woman who was being prosecuted for murder after she miscarried her child in a failed suicide attempt. Currently in the news, a marine in Maryland is fighting his conviction for self-inflicted injury (he cut his wrists in a suicide attempt), which brought with it six months in the brig and a bad conduct discharge. And many years ago in Michigan, when my brother overdosed on my grandmother's prescription medications in a suicide attempt, the cops came and arrested him a month later for possession of a controlled substance - which they seized from his room when the paramedics responded with them to the 911 call. He pled guilty to avoid prison.

I suspect this is happening far more often than any of us could imagine. We need to be substantiating and documenting these reports, and bringing them to light - the city and county attorneys making these decisions need to be held responsible for them, and people struggling with serious mental illness desperately need the support of the community behind them when they're being prosecuted for their symptoms - like despair, impulsivity, delusions, lack of insight, and self-injurious behavior.

I'm not saying that a psychiatric disorder exempts a person from responsibility for their actions. There's a difference between prosecuting a criminal with a mental illness, and prosecuting a person for the "crime" of being mentally ill, however - that happens far too often in America. It's important to make that distinction and be conservative about filing charges in these kinds of circumstances for many reasons - particularly in Arizona, where the mentally ill are more than nine times as likely to end up behind bars as in the state hospital. 

Even if there's some merit to a case, for example, or someone was particularly reckless and harmed others, the negative effects on the community of prosecuting it can still be greater than the benefits of doing so. It can have the chilling effect of discouraging people from reaching out for help after initiating a suicide attempt for fear of being criminally punished. That marine's conviction for self-inflicted injury is especially troubling given the high rate of suicide among service members these days - it's not like he shot himself in the foot to avoid deployment. I can hear a lot of GIs now telling themselves to be sure to use their service weapon if they take themselves out, so there's no chance of survival lest the same humiliation befall them...no more room for ambivalence there.


People aren't usually thinking rationally when they try to kill themselves, and while we should all be mindful not to harm others in the course of harming ourselves (as in with drugged or drunk driving), the consequences of such prosecutions - discouraging people from seeking help in the midst of a suicidal crisis - can be devastating to the "innocent" - those who are careful not to take others out with them - who may die for fear of summoning our community's emergency responders if they have lest minute regrets. It also leaves a lot of other victims behind to grieve them. That's not what we expect for our tax dollars when our fellow citizens are suffering so.

If the profession can't rein its own members in and establish some better parameters to minimize criminal charges against people for the symptoms of their mental illness, then advocates for suicide prevention should be hounding their lawmakers to explore legislative remedies to this problem. In the meantime, please help me publicize when such prosecutions occur so we know just how often it happens, and under whose watch. Spread the word among public defenders, prisoners, the mental health community, and anyone else who might care. And tell those with the power to make decisions about such things that this is unacceptable.


Gary Verberg is the City Attorney for Phoenix - it's my understanding that all criminal prosecutions done by the city are ultimately his responsibility. I haven't verified the details of the allegation about the case above, so don't go off accusing his office of brutalizing people with psychiatric disorders. Just please contact him and make sure he knows that city residents expect suicide attempts to be treated as a medical emergency, not a criminal offense. The contact information for his office is:

Street Address:
300 West Washington, 8th Floor
Phoenix, AZ 85003 

Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 4500
Phoenix, AZ 85030-4500

Phone Numbers:
602-262-6461
Fax: 602-262-7052

The Maricopa County Attorney, Bill Montgomery, didn't make it to the roundtable last night, but he has been to others in the past year and has expressed his own sentiment that it's inappropriate, as a rule, to criminalize people who would not otherwise be offenders but for the symptoms of their mental illness. While we were talking largely about things like destroying property and being disorderly in the course of a psychotic episode, I think this kind of thing would fall under the same category. If you want to let him know your feelings on the issue, though, just in case they got some poor soul facing jail for trying to kill themselves now, drop him a line too at: 301 W. Jefferson St., Phoenix, AZ 85003 / 602-506-3411. I write to him all the time, myself.

Finally, if you're only going to write to one person or place about this, hit these folks: The Arizona Prosecuting Attorneys Advisory Council. It's made up of county attorneys across the state to promote their common crime-fighting agenda with the public and legislature, apparently. They're the folks who invest in propaganda campaigns that further demonize the prison population to support their claim that they've been putting all the right people behind bars in this state, and that we therefore don't need to reform sentencing guidelines or eliminate mandatory minimums. They can be reached at: 1951 W. Camelback Rd., Suite 202, Phoenix, AZ 85015 / 602-542-7222. 

Be sure to send a copy of the letter you send to any of them to the Arizona Republic - or to me - as well, so it can be published. Contact the AZ Republic at: the Editor, The Arizona Republic, P.O. Box 1950, Phoenix, AZ 85001. Letters may also be faxed to (602) 444-8933. Or use their on-line form here.

My address is PO Box 20494, Phoenix, AZ 85036. Or you can email me at prisonabolitionist@gmail.com.


Thanks.

Prosecuting innocence: Free Courtney Bisbee.

I've heard this mother fight for her relationship with her daughter in family court myself, and I've seen much of the evidence that could exonerate her. Not only is there reasonable doubt as to her guilt, I'm absolutely convinced of Courtney's innocence. She's a remarkable woman, driven by her love for her little girl to fight all the forces the state can amass against a person - and then some.

Andrew Thomas' tenure did damage to many ordinary people's lives here; we'll see where Bill Montgomery goes. The county attorney has a duty to victims first and foremost, and that includes victims of the state, but it takes courage for politicians - especially here - to take that kind of responsibility. Once they convict you, everyone seems more concerned with avoiding liability by admitting harm than upholding justice.

A good prosecutor is driven to find the truth, not simply seek convictions, though - and a good prosecutor's eyes on this case is what's needed. Six years is already too long to have your mom or child taken from you - that can never be recovered. Never. There's a whole family being punished with Courtney, in fact, victims themselves of a multitude of horrible crimes - including the violence of incarceration. They all deserve to be free.

So, those who still think this system really delivers justice - and that only the "guilty" get brutalized by it anyway - need to read this woman's story. Then go sign the petition.

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

Supporters Fight to Get Courtney Bisbee a New Trial

by Charles Davis ·
February 15, 2011

Topics:

• Prosecutorial Misconduct ·
• Wrongful Convictions

There was no physical evidence linking Courtney Bisbee to a crime, just the incomplete and inconsistent testimony of child witnesses who claimed they saw her engage in inappropriate touching with a 13 year old boy. And it was based on that testimony alone that she was convicted in 2006 of child molestation and sentenced to 11 years in prison.

Bisbee, a 35-year-old mother and former school nurse, was prosecuted by the office of disgraced District Attorney Andrew Thomas, the subject of an ongoing FBI investigation who has been accused by the Arizona State Bar of having engaged in at least 33 ethical violations while in office, from abuse of power to prosecutorial misconduct. Thomas is also perhaps best known for prosecuting a 16-year-old boy as a child sex offender for allegedly showing a Playboy to two of his friends.

In January 2007, the case against Bisbee – already thin – began to unravel, as journalist Stephen Lemons reported in a comprehensive piece for The Phoenix New Times. Indeed, one of the prosecution's “star” witnesses, Nik Valles, signed an affidavit stating that he was forced to lie on the stand – forced to say his brother, Jon, was groped by Bisbee at a friend's house – by his mother, who he says put him up to it in order to cash-in from a lawsuit against the school where Bisbee worked.

In the affidavit, Nik states that his mother, Janette Sloan, “wanted my brother, Jonathan Valles, to make false accusations against Courtney Bisbee for financial gain.” And he says he witnessed her tell his brother “to lie and to stick to the story and, 'You'll be a rich kid.”

Nik said that, as a 15 year old, he had no choice but to heed his mother's wishes – to lie on the stand and help convict an innocent woman. He now lives with his father.

"I love her; she's my mom,” Nik told the New Times. "But I don't agree with any of the decisions that she makes, and I wouldn't trust her with my life.”

Such a stunning revelation should have immediately earned Bisbee a new trial – if not her freedom outright. But Thomas ignored it – why let something like exculpatory evidence get in the way of a conviction? – as has his successor, Bill Montgomery. And so Courtney Bisbee remains in prison.

But she has her supporters.

Dawn Kirkpatrick attended the same church as Bisbee in Scottsdale, Arizona. And while she didn't know her personally, she says they had friends in common.

“One of these friends put a letter about Courtney's case on each table of a woman's Bible study that I was attending,” Kirkpatrick tells Change.org. “I picked up the letter that day and was interested in finding out more information.” And that she did, spending hours going through the evidence on a website Bisbee's parents set up about her case, www.Justice4Courtney.com.

“I started to read the evidence and ended up staying up almost the whole night digging into it all,” says Kirkpatrick. “To me it was quite obvious that she was completely innocent of this alleged crime and I couldn't understand why she was still in prison. From there I had to learn how difficult it is to get someone out of prison once they are convicted.”

And from there she decided to do something about it, working to help raise awareness about Bisbee's case and starting a petition that aims to get her a new trial.

“I have become friends with Courtney and visit her in prison,” says Kirkpatrick. “As a person who was assaulted myself at the age of 16, I would never support someone accused of a crime like this unless I believed 100 percent in their innocence.”

The Anguished exit of Kent Knudson, Community Activist.

As most of you from Phoenix know, Kent Knudson was a local community activist who committed suicide September 25, having fallen into a deep depression in large part because of a series of criminal prosecutions. He was an outspoken critic of the CJ system, and fought for reform and prisoner rights, among other things.

I didn't really know Kent myself, though I'm sure we've been shoulder to shoulder at a few demonstrations and other events, particularly this past year. The peace and justice community that he was such a part of is devastated, of course.

I'm still sorting through all the grieving emails and tributes that showed up in my in-box this week, and will post more about his life and legal battles when I find the most complete story about what happened. For now, here's his obituary, sent to everyone in his email address book; that's his own electronic signature at the bottom.

Because of the public scrutiny of the accused, the dehumanization of "criminals", the expense and energy one needs to invest in legal defense, the humiliation of jail, the constant coercion to take a plea under threat of state violence if found guilty at trial, and all the social consequences of being a felon, prosecution and criminalization can be so much more damaging to a life, career, family, and spirit than what may actually be handed down by a judge - that truth is always left out of the sentencing. It pushes way too many people - including the innocent and mentally impaired - to take their own lives over things that should never even merit jail, much less execution. I hope we can turn that around soon.

Please, all, remember that while suicide is 100% preventable, it can trigger a cascade of despair and further self-destruction within communities; keep close tabs on your own moods as well as on your loved ones in the coming weeks and months. If you need to, call a friend, see a professional, or dial a hotline to talk, cry, or rage. Try to wait to act on your impulses until the urgency passes - you can always reserve the option of suicide for when your moods improve, which they eventually will; that's why I'm still here - once I feel better, even if conditions are worse, killing myself never looks like the best solution to whatever I'm struggling with. Remember - we need all the help we can get on this planet; we need to keep the good guys alive to get through this.

Condolences to Kent's family and friends - to all whom his life and death so deeply touched.

Have a blessed journey Home, Kent.

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

From: Kent 911cd@cox.net>

Date: October 2, 2010 9:19:24 AM EDT

To: kent knudson 911cd@cox.net>

Subject: Kent Knudson in Memoriam

It is with great sadness that I must report to you the news of the passing of my great friend and hero, Kent Knudson. Kent had been suffering from depression over yet another traumatic legal difficulty and facing two felony charges, on top of his "Cowcrap" conviction. The pressures of this latest legal action taken against him, the possibility of 3 years of jail time, and other factors lead him into a depression from which Kent had decided to take matters into his own control, ending his life.

This has been a very difficult time for me and Sarah, and others who were close to Kent. I ask you to come together at Kent's memorial service to reflect and celebrate with us Kent's life, pursuits and achievements.

Memorial services will be held on Wednesday, October 6th at 7pm, at the Arizona Biltmore Resort.

Thank You,

Sham Rao

OBITUARY

Kent Randolph Knudson

November 11, 1949 - September 25, 2010

Although schooled in Engineering Mathematics, Kent's greatest contributions are the result of his life long career as an photographer. Having licensed his works to commercial stock agencies, advertisers, and marketing companies, Kent's art has dominated and influenced all of his life's pursuits.

Kent's later life was radically altered as a result of an unfortunate cascading injustice at the hands of the government. During the years that Kent spent caring for his beloved mother who was developing Alzheimer's disease, Kent fell into legal trouble as a result of attempting to safeguard his mother against an invading herd of cattle on their 40 acre ranch near Snowflake, AZ.

Compelled into a new life of social justice and activism, Kent sought to fight the injustices he has suffered as a consequence of his "Cowcrap" ordeal, devoting his activist efforts towards:

1. Repealing Open Range Laws

2. Ending Malicious Prosecution

3. Facilitating Prison Reform, and Inmate Human Rights

4. Promoting Jury Nullification and Court Reform

Among other activist pursuits, Kent is well known for leading the 9/11Truth movement in Phoenix, AZ and hosting a 9/11 Truth and Accountability conference. He also supported various other Peace and Justice causes including: Ending the US military occupations, defending human rights, environmentalism and sustainability.

Kent is survived by his sister Cathy Leavitt, nephews Brent Leavitt & Thomas Leavitt, niece Paula Thompson, companion Sarah Fox, longtime friend Sham Rao, his cat Ewok, and the Social Justice Activist Community.

Kent will be missed mostly for the passion and drive with which he lived and demonstrated throughout his life and art.

SERVICES:

Memorial service:

Arizona Biltmore Resort

Wednesday, October 6th, 2010

Visitation: 7-8pm

Memorial: 8-10pm

Burial:

Snowflake Cemetery

Snowflake, AZ

Saturday, October 9th, 2010 @3pm

For more information:

Sham Rao

623-229-4754

harlequin516@styk.net

Kent

{The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke (1729-1797)}

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

A reminder for all the colorful peace and justice activists we've lost over the years, from the film about Abbie Hoffman, "Steal This Movie": We can't sing louder than the guns when we're gone...