When Prosecutors Believe the Unbelievable

Story here. Excerpt:

'Three years ago, one of the strangest criminal cases in recent memory began in Charlottesville, Virginia, where I live, when a young woman sent a series of text messages telling her boyfriend that a man had abducted her, followed by a series of texts, allegedly from her captor, taunting her boyfriend with threats of sexual violence. Her story was strange, and the case was fraught with complications from the get-go, but the accused ended up in prison long after the doubts outweighed the evidence.

This story is bizarre, but it’s not all that unusual: Prosecutors can prosecute even the weakest, most clearly flawed cases relentlessly, and innocent people can end up in jail.

This week, after two and a half years in prison, Mark Weiner saw his conviction vacated. It finally ended a saga in which Weiner was arrested, convicted, and sentenced to eight years in jail on charges of abducting a woman with the intent to sexually harm her.
...
When defense counsel learned of the cellphone evidence and attempted to use one of the detectives as a defense witness, Lunsford had him disqualified as an expert, objecting to the fact that the defense attorney hadn’t subpoenaed the right witnesses to get the phone record evidence in. When the defense lawyer asked in chambers for a continuance so that he could call the correct witnesses, the motion was denied by trial court Judge Cheryl Higgins. Jurors would never hear what the phone tower records showed. Local lawyers and trial observers were shocked.
...
Because we elect our prosecutors, there is no chance of apology, and no admission of error. Justice by popularity contest will ensure that. But Mark Weiner’s journey into legal purgatory is more than just a quirky local tale; it shows why innocent people get trapped in a system in which it is costless for prosecutors to make errors, while mistakes made by defense counsel at trial are virtually impossible to correct.

Mark Weiner’s freedom did not come about this week because the system worked. It came about because the system protected the system from abject embarrassment. That isn’t justice. That’s just sad.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

there are hundreds of lawyer types in high offices in Washington representing 'we the people' and not one of them recognized that a layered 1961 birth certificate w/ several mistakes/anomalies and produced on a computer might be a fraud? I saw it, and so did thousands of other honest Americans. so

just what 'we the people' are they representing?

or

is this malpractice/unethical behavior? did they know it was a fraud and then said nothing, or was it just incompetence on a global level? or was it something else, like total corruption?

either way, we need more regular people, like accountants, engineers, and so forth in Washington representing us. too many lawyers are crooks.

Like0 Dislike0