A group of law professors has published new complaints against 17 New York prosecutors, highlighting behavior that in many cases sent innocent people to prison, the latest salvo in an attempt to account for it last month. was revived by a federal court.
A prosecutor was found to be withholding important evidence in a trial by the Brooklyn District Attorney’s office, forcing an innocent man to spend more than 24 years in prison. Another refused to tell a jury about the lenient plea deals a key witness received in exchange for testifying, leaving two men with nearly 17 years in prison. A third made a witness lie; the defendant spent nearly six years in prison in that case.
Some of the grievances recently filed by law professors relate to cases from the early 1990s, when crime was high and there was political pressure to win convictions. The professors, who usually teach in New York schools, want to draw public attention to the prosecution’s misconduct and boost the state’s disciplinary process.
In each of the complaints, a judge or prosecutor had previously acknowledged the violation. But there were no public records of discipline for any of the accusers, many of whom still work in the city’s justice system. They gave a course in legal ethics.
“It’s relatively easy to stay on your feet and go elsewhere,” said Daniel Medwed, one of six law professors who not only posted the complaints online but also presented the complaints to the state commissions responsible. for punishing lawyers. The grievances, which are reviewed by committees made up of both attorneys and non-lawyers, can lead to public admonition, suspension, and even suspension. But experts say this rarely happens, and complaints often remain private.
“Most prosecutors don’t get sanctions, and most lawyers get no sanctions,” said Bruce Green, who directs a center for legal ethics at Fordham University. Mr Green is not one of the law professors who filed the complaints.
It was not self-evident that the professors could make their complaints public. After filing a first round of grievances last year, they were warned by the city’s top attorney, James Johnson, that publishing the files was a violation of state law that keeps the attorney’s disciplinary records confidential.
The law professors, who partner with Civil Rights Corps, a nonprofit campaigning for criminal justice reform, have filed charges against Mr. Johnson’s successor, Georgia Pestana, as well as the Queens District Attorney and several officials. of the complaints committee. In June, a federal judge, Victor Marrero, ruled in their favor, saying the First Amendment prohibited the state from blocking the professors’ actions. Some parts of the decision have been appealed, but the professors have now submitted a new round of complaints.
The complaints come at a time of uncertainty about the future of prosecution. While prosecutors seeking to reform the criminal justice system have continued to win elections, increased gun crime and changing perceptions of crime in general have disrupted the momentum of the progressive prosecutorial movement. That crosswind contributed to the high-profile recall from San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin.
Law professors say the current climate makes it all the more important to expose criminal misconduct. Mr. Medwed, who teaches at Northeastern University in Massachusetts, cited Mr. Boudin’s recall and the opposition faced by Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascon, who is also facing a recall. mr. Medwed said “more conservative crime-fighting elements are on the way,” which could lead to renewed pressure on prosecutors to win convictions.
“That’s all the more reason for greater transparency and greater accountability,” said Mr. medwed.
One of the cases put forward by the professors dates back to the winter of 1991, when a man named Andre Hatchett was arrested by police a week after the discovery of a murdered woman.
Only one witness – Jerry Williams, who was arrested in an unrelated burglary – identified Mr Hatchett as the perpetrator, having initially identified another man.
The prosecution, Nicholas Fengos, has called Mr. Hatchett was not informed of the conflicting identifications. Mr. Fengos also did not object to an inconsistency between what Mr. Williams told investigators – that he had used crack cocaine on the day of the murder – and what he told the jury, which was that he had never used the drug. Despite these and other improbabilities in Mr Williams’ account of the murder, Mr Fengos continued the prosecution and was convicted.
Mr Hatchett spent nearly 25 years in prison before the King’s County District Attorney’s office, after reviewing his case, recommended a court overturn the conviction. Mr. Hatchett later won a wrongful conviction lawsuit for $12 million.
The professors demand that Mr. Fengos, who works for the state prison system and remains a licensed lawyer, be suspended or disbarred. Mr. Fengos did not respond to voice messages requesting comment.
When asked why her group focused on cases handled decades ago, often by diligent officials, Cynthia Godsoe, a professor at Brooklyn Law School, said prosecutors should not work diligently.
“Their mandate is to act in the interest of justice,” she said. “If people don’t want to do that and are extra careful about following the rules — that’s what they should be doing — then they shouldn’t be prosecutors.”
The professors hope that social pressure will force the complaints committees to take a closer look at their complaints. Laws protect prosecutors from civil pressure and the commissions allow lawyers to disciplinary action against each other, in a system where there is little oversight.
Late last year, the New York Chief Justice appointed three members to a newly created state prosecution commission. But the committee has little independent disciplinary power; the law requires it to submit its findings to the complaints committees – at which point the committees would again be responsible for any consequences.
The commission has not yet taken any public action. One of his appointees, Michael A. Simons, dean of St. John’s University School of Law, did not respond to a request for comment. And so the professors, fresh from their trial, still see a place for their work.
“We are trying to make systemic changes, to allow the complaints committee or more generally the government to do their job,” Ms Godsoe said. “We want to throw a spotlight on: what are they actually doing? People have a right to know.”
