FULL TITLE: 'Clear causal link': Lawyers accuse Kamala Harris of defying Supreme Court by hiding evidence from defense attorneys
While district attorney for San Francisco, Kamala Harris withheld evidence that could have exonerated defendants on multiple occasions, in violation of a key due process ruling by the Supreme Court.
Between 2004 and 2010, Harris’s office failed to inform defense attorneys about criminal and professional misconduct records that raised questions about the credibility of government witnesses. The lapses led to the dismissal of nearly 1,000 cases and a scathing 2010 ruling by a Superior Court judge that accused Harris’ office of breaching due process rights.
Legal scholars told the Washington Examiner that Harris’ office appeared to have violated the Supreme Court’s 1963 Brady v. Maryland decision. The ruling held that prosecutors must turn over potentially exculpatory evidence to the defense.
There is a “clear causal link between Brady violations and wrongful conviction” said Craig Trainor, a New York attorney who specializes in due process cases.
“The reasons for failure to disclose exculpatory evidence range from bad faith to inexperience to excessive caseloads to a tunnel vision to get the ‘guilty defendant’ at all costs to rank politics, as we see in Kamala Harris’ case,” he said.
Jason Kreag, a law professor at the University of Arizona and a former staffer at the Innocence Project, said Brady is also crucial because it “is designed to promote fairness in our system.”
Kreag said this was particularly true in Harris’ case. “There is no doubt that the prosecutor's case is impeached when it is built on information from people who have credibility problems, as was the case here. When that happens, prosecutors owe a duty to disclose to the defense things that can be used to impeach the state’s case. That was a failure...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Why was she never charged with obstruction of justice or contempt of court? A’s if I don’t already know the answer.
While district attorney for San Francisco, Kamala Harris withheld evidence that could have exonerated defendants on multiple occasions, in violation of a key due process ruling by the Supreme Court.
Between 2004 and 2010, Harris’s office failed to inform defense attorneys about criminal and professional misconduct records that raised questions about the credibility of government witnesses. The lapses led to the dismissal of nearly 1,000 cases and a scathing 2010 ruling by a Superior Court judge that accused Harris’ office of breaching due process rights.
Legal scholars told the Washington Examiner that Harris’ office appeared to have violated the Supreme Court’s 1963 Brady v. Maryland decision. The ruling held that prosecutors must turn over potentially exculpatory evidence to the defense.
There is a “clear causal link between Brady violations and wrongful conviction” said Craig Trainor, a New York attorney who specializes in due process cases.
“The reasons for failure to disclose exculpatory evidence range from bad faith to inexperience to excessive caseloads to a tunnel vision to get the ‘guilty defendant’ at all costs to rank politics, as we see in Kamala Harris’ case,” he said.
Jason Kreag, a law professor at the University of Arizona and a former staffer at the Innocence Project, said Brady is also crucial because it “is designed to promote fairness in our system.”
Kreag said this was particularly true in Harris’ case. “There is no doubt that the prosecutor's case is impeached when it is built on information from people who have credibility problems, as was the case here. When that happens, prosecutors owe a duty to disclose to the defense things that can be used to impeach the state’s case. That was a failure...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Why was she never charged with obstruction of justice or contempt of court? A’s if I don’t already know the answer.
