ILNews

System delivers injustice

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Justice in Question

Six men from Indiana had their day in court. All proclaimed and maintained their innocence to the prosecutors and defense attorneys handling their cases and to the judges and juries presiding over the trials.

In the end, Hoosier courts handed down a combined sentence of more than 350 years, and those six men served an aggregate 83 years behind bars. Dozens of hands within the state’s criminal justice system police, prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges, court and law firm assistances at the trial and post-conviction levels have touched those cases at some point but didn’t stop what turned out to be eight decades of incarceration.

Defendants Richard Alexander, Harold Buntin, Larry Mayes, David L. Scott, Dwayne Scruggs, and Jerry Watkins have no connection because the facts of their cases, the charged offenses, criminal proceedings, and ultimate convictions were unrelated. But a common thread among those six is that each was wrongfully convicted and served time behind bars for crimes they didn’t commit before being exonerated.

Professor Fran Watson

It’s an ongoing saga unfolding nationwide, and the numbers continue to increase. Before 2008, Indiana had five exonerations. Now, six have been freed, and other defendants who’ve maintained their innocence from the start are attempting to obtain their own exonerations.

Those on the front lines say it’s part of a bigger puzzle that may have an undefined number of pieces and intricacies within a case, past and present. Variables can include underfunded police, a demanding public and political pressure, crime-tough prosecutors wanting to ease that pressure and ensure public safety, inadequate public defense, overwhelming court dockets, appellate judges bound by caselaw and precedent for deference to lower courts, and forensic crime labs that face backlogs in reexamining decades-old DNA, evidence, and criminal justice procedures.

“It’s awful to have someone in prison you believe is innocent,” said Fran Watson, an attorney and Indiana University School of Law - Indianapolis professor who leads a criminal defense clinic that handles wrongful-conviction cases. “It’s not just enough to be innocent; you have to show the violation. As long as it takes, you’re particularly glad when justice gets done, finally.”
 

Hoosier exonerees

Five of the six Hoosier exonerees have been freed in the past decade; the most recent exoneration was in January and the earliest of these cases dates to 1993. The Innocence Project has taken on four more cases in recent years, according to staff attorney Jason Kreag, and so far, Watson said that Mayes’ release is the clinic’s only exoneration.

In January, Scott was freed from prison after 23 years and four months behind bars, which was part of the 50-year-sentence he received for the murder of an 89-year-old woman in Terre Haute during a home burglary. DNA tests last year implicated another man and a suspect in Kentucky has since been arrested.

Another man, Buntin, was released last year after serving 13 years from a conviction in a 1984 rape case. His case took a twist, though, in that DNA proved his innocence in 2005 but the Indianapolis man stayed incarcerated for almost two additional years because of misfiled paperwork at the court. That has led to disciplinary proceedings against Marion Superior Judge Grant Hawkins and Commissioner Nancy Broyles. Buntin has filed lawsuits against the jurists and county.

Indianapolis attorney Michael Sutherlin, who represents Buntin and is also working on a possible civil suit in Scott’s wrongful conviction, said the trends are becoming more apparent. He sees innocence initiatives exposing the fallibility of the criminal justice system overall, but he acknowledges there sometimes can be “a perfect storm of events” - brutal crimes, judges who want to be hard on criminals in an election year, communities up in arms, pressure on police to find the person who committed the crime, and pressured public defenders with overwhelming caseloads.

It can be tough to find the problems, particularly in older cases where evidence has been lost or damaged and witness accounts may no longer be available, Sutherlin and other attorneys say.

“These things can happen so easily, and these cases can open people up to the dangers of the system,” said New York attorney Nick Brustin, who has handled at least 20 wrongful-conviction cases nationally, including Mayes’ federal civil rights lawsuit stemming from a wrongful conviction and 21 years of incarceration. “Our hope is that these will lead to change.”
 

The Indiana connection

A part of a national network of law and journalism schools working on wrongful-conviction cases, the IU School of Law - Indianapolis clinic is dedicated to raising awareness about the failings of the criminal justice system and the thousands of innocent people in jail and on death row. The clinic has worked for the past decade with the New York-based non-profit Innocence Project, the nation’s most prominent organization devoted to proving wrongful convictions.

They often work with a wrongful-conviction clinic through Northwestern University and others throughout the country and cooperate with the Indiana State Public Defender’s Office, Watson said.

The Indianapolis clinic is currently the only one in the state affiliated with the network, Watson said. She and her students have filed appearances in about a dozen cases through the years, but they’ve put in hundreds of hours of work investigating and researching other cases that ultimately couldn’t be pursued.

While the wrongful-conviction clinic currently operates through the criminal-defense clinic at the law school, Watson said it will become independent in the future.

“This has the feeling of a movement and is all about what the system does wrong and what we can do better,” she said.

Studies of wrongful convictions suggest that thousands of innocent people are in jails and prisons across the country. The Innocence Project pursues 250 cases at any given time and reviews thousands of additional cases for legal action, according to Kreag, who handles all the wrongful-conviction cases from Indiana. Hundreds of letters are received each month, but only about 1 percent of those cases will be accepted, he said. A third of those accepted cases are ultimately closed because evidence has been lost or destroyed over time, Kreag said.

The most common legal issues in cases of wrongful convictions involve inaccurate witness identification, false testimony, government misconduct, and DNA-based evidence that later proves that person wasn’t the one responsible, according to Kreag. Indiana has adequate post-conviction laws that allow the DNA testing, but it doesn’t have any DNA storage laws or recorded interrogation statutes to improve the process.

Three-quarters of the DNA-based cases involve original misidentification of the perpetrator, Kreag said.

The Innocence Project reports that more than 220 exonerations have occurred nationally based on DNA evidence, but Kreag said that doesn’t take into account the criminal cases it doesn’t get involved with those lacking any biological evidence, such as burglaries, thefts, or criminal mischief convictions.

“Mistakes can be made so easily, and they are made routinely and that’s why it’s essential that everyone be aware no matter what part of the system they’re at,” Kreag said. “There’s no reason to think these mistakes can’t and aren’t happening in other cases we can’t get to, where there is not any biological evidence to review. We’re only seeing a small portion of what’s happening out there.”

To read more about Larry Mayes, read "After Exoneration,"   which appears in the Sept. 17-30, 2008, issue of Indiana Lawyer

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

  2. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

  3. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

  4. "Meanwhile small- and mid-size firms are getting squeezed and likely will not survive unless they become a boutique firm." I've been a business attorney in small, and now mid-size firm for over 30 years, and for over 30 years legal consultants have been preaching this exact same mantra of impending doom for small and mid-sized firms -- verbatim. This claim apparently helps them gin up merger opportunities from smaller firms who become convinced that they need to become larger overnight. The claim that large corporations are interested in cost-saving and efficiency has likewise been preached for decades, and is likewise bunk. If large corporations had any real interest in saving money they wouldn't use large law firms whose rates are substantially higher than those of high-quality mid-sized firms.

  5. The family is the foundation of all human government. That is the Grand Design. Modern governments throw off this Design and make bureaucratic war against the family, as does Hollywood and cultural elitists such as third wave feminists. Since WWII we have been on a ship of fools that way, with both the elite and government and their social engineering hacks relentlessly attacking the very foundation of social order. And their success? See it in the streets of Fergusson, on the food stamp doles (mostly broken families)and in the above article. Reject the Grand Design for true social function, enter the Glorious State to manage social dysfunction. Our Brave New World will be a prison camp, and we will welcome it as the only way to manage given the anarchy without it.

ADVERTISEMENT