Morton Case Sparks Calls for Texas Evidence Law Reform
Not long after his mother was murdered, 3-and-a-half-year-old Eric Morton began to tell his grandmother what he had seen that terrible day.
“Mommy’s crying. She’s — Stop it. Go away,” his grandmother said he told her. She asked why his mother was crying.
“’Cause the monster’s there,” Eric said.
Gingerly, she pressed for more details.
“He hit Mommy. He broke the bed,” her grandson said.
“Is Mommy still crying?”
“No, Mommy stopped.”
Finally, his grandmother asked the question she was most dreading: “Was Daddy there?”
“No,” he said. “Mommy and Eric was there.”
The next day, she called ...
Comments (18)
William Leavenworth
When it can be proven that prosecutors sat on exculpatory evidence, those prosecutors should at the very least be taken to a public place, and flogged with a leaded cat 'o nine tails until their backs slough off. The perversion of justice is a termite in the entire structure of our Republic.
Samdavis
I don't advocate violence but I wouldn't be sad if there is some sort of retribution against the prosecutor and two district attorney that conspired to keep this poor man in prison. If these monsters had to fear the consequences of their immoral acts maybe there would be more of an emphasis on justice and less on a conviction-driven system. Williamson County has a well-deserved reputation for believing that the end justifies the means.
Frances Morey
I think that hiding exculpatory evidence should carry criminal sanctions--as a felony!
Frances Morey
As far as the defense attorney turning over evidence to the DA, that should not become a requirement. When a person hires a defense lawyer attorney-client privilege should over-ride the sharing of evidence mandate. However the prosecution record, 39 exoneration cases that involved the withholding of exculpatory evidence, certainly call for far more than a slap on the wrist. It should carry the threat of a penitentiary sentence.
Cynical prosecutors and the War on Drugs have turned our criminal-justice system into a detestable farce. How can we respect the law when those who conduct the process have no respect for human rights?
Jon Roland
There are, as the article says, limits to what legal reforms can do to prevent convictions of innocents if the prosecutors are determined to commit misconduct. A law is needed requiring investigators and prosecutors to share all evidence, not just exculpatory evidence, with the defense, but not the reverse, because prosecutors bent on misconduct could use disclosures by the defense to engage in misconduct in other ways.
One has to wonder how many other innocents have been wrongly convicted for whom there is no DNA or other evidence that could exonerate them. Such evidence is unlikely in most cases of wrongful conviction, so there must be a great many of them remaining to receive justice.
There is a larger problem here: the lack of sufficient evidence to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That the DNA evidence could exonerate indicates the remaining evidence did not meet the burden of proof, and the judge and jury should have recognized that. Evidence of opportunity is not enough. There must also be evidence of motive, method, and in the absence of eyewitnesses, evidence of a pattern of behavior with which the crime was consistent.
Thus, we have two main problems in need of reform:
1. The incentives that induce prosecutorial misconduct, and the lack of disincentives to discourage it; and
2. Lack of training of judges, and especially jurors, on how to judge both evidence and the law.
1. Prosecutorial incentives
The main incentive is re-election or re-appointment as prosecutor or election to a higher office, with the conviction rate being touted as the basis for that. As long as candidates get elected by winning convictions and not by refraining from prosecuting innocents, the problem will persist. That suggests two key reforms:
a. A limit of two terms for a prosecutor in the same jurisdiction.
b. A requirement that a prosecutor not seek or accept any other elected office, state or federal, for ten years after one or two terms as a prosecutor.
c. Make prosecutorial misconduct a crime and open the process to private prosecutors to prosecute them, which means opening grand juries to hear indictments from private citizens who it might appoint to prosecute.
d. Require all arguments of law be made to the jury, not just to the judge, because some wrongful conviction comes from the jury not getting all sides on what the law is. The judge may have to rule on motions on points of law, but the jury needs to review how such decisions were made in reaching a verdict.
e. Forbid plea bargains and reduced penalties for giving evidence.
f. Require juries in all criminal trials, even if the defendant pleads guilty. There are also falsely entered pleas, and a jury needs to be involved to spot that.
2. Training
Prior to about WWI people got training in how to serve as competent jurors in school, in public gatherings, and by serving on juries. In the 1950s my mother served on a jury about once every two years, and on almost every jury there were some members who had previous experience as jurors. They all took their duty very seriously, and were determined to do a good job as jurors. That situation deteriorated during the 20th century. That suggests we should:
a. Teach law and judicial process to high school students in courses on American government.
b. Teach evaluation of evidence in science courses.
c. Teach resistance to propaganda and logical fallacies in English and history courses.
d. Have students observe actual trials and interview participants.
e. Have students conduct their own innocence projects.
More at http://constitution.org/jury/pj/pj-us.htm
Angie Agapetus
The deputy chief in the Tarrant County D.A.'s office you quote, Jack Srickland, badly represented a death row client of his, Quintin Jones, by missing deadlines in both his state and federal appeals. Consequently Quintin lost his federal appeal due to lateness. I was very upset to see him used as a source, someone I believe to be a wholly inadequate attorney. I am an anti-death penalty activist and visit Quintin on death row.
Below is the link to a Houston Chronicle newspaper article by Lise Olsen that addresses the issue of attorneys who miss deadlines and mentions Jack Strickland bad lawyering for Quintin Jones. It is ironic that he is quoted as a source in an article about unethical prosecution on a criminal case that went bad.
That he now works for the prosecution is no surprise to me. It probably is where his true heart is if he has one.
http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Tardy-Texas-lawyers-in-capital-cases-still-paid-1739659.php
Wilco Watchdog
Many questions remain, and one being asked is this one: “How many other times has this insult to justice happened under Bradley’s watch?” Answers to that question may never be known, but one thing is certain. Seasons may change, but people do not. If the answers to the critical questions are answered in deposition by Morton’s attorneys and indicate that prosecutorial misconduct did occur, harsh consequences should be applied to those responsible.
And now Bradley, who admits to a close friendship with Anderson, is trying to insert himself into the case. Bradley himself is responsible for sequestering important evidence which, if released many years ago, would have allowed Morton to leave prison then, not last week. It would have also allowed law enforcement agencies to look for the prime suspect, whose name is known from the DNA on the bandana and DNA from another murder committed in Austin a year after Morton went to prison. The same suspect who is still at large. Bradley’s actions not only cost tax payers hundreds of thousands of dollars, but more importantly, it cost an innocent man his freedom for several additional years.
We have been follaing this closely at www.wilcowatchdog.org and feel Bradley needs to recuse himself from any further involvement in this case.
A. Bryant
Williamson County has had a bunch of thugs running the county for too long. The State Bar needs to grow a pair and pop crooked prosecutors, District Attorney's, and cops whose job is to insure justice, not force their Un-Justice system on the innocent. Bradly and Anderson need to go to prison for 25 years and made to wear pink panties and tights.
Max Sped
There should be a state law requiring the definition or ‘District Attorney’ to include that the primary duty of the District Attorney is to ‘determine the truth’.
When it is discovered that a Prosecutor has let his desire to win a case take precedent over the truth, there should be a penalty equal to the maximum penalty applicable to the charges against the defendant other than the death penalty.
Gregory Windham
The Voters must hold these men accountable. With absolute rule in County government for 20 years, the corruption is natural within the Republican party. It isn't the party's fault. We just win baby. But now, it will be up to the Republicans of Williamson County to replace all these men and women that have derailed our county government and it's justice system.
Enedelia Obregon via Texas Tribune on Facebook
I'll say it needs reform. If Morton had received the death penalty, he'd be dead by now.
Bill Eaves via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Lawyers are thieves!! Why do u think they become politicians?
Jose B. Gonzalez via Texas Tribune on Facebook
It shouldn't be that difficult - they should be required to turn over EVERYTHING to the defense - EVERYTHING...
Samdavis
It's really refreshing to see well-thought out intelligent comments.
Lissa Hattersley via Texas Tribune on Facebook
The Innocence Project has had more cases in Texas than in any other state. That speaks volumes!
Jon Roland
The voters can't be counted on to vote out prosecutors who wilfully and carelessly prosecute the innocent. Most voters vote for "tough on crime", which amounts to "Hang 'em all and let God sort 'em out." They imagine that only "other people" get prosecuted, and would be shocked to find out the hard way that no one is more than one false accusation away from prison in our present-day so-called criminal justice system, which is more about winning statistics than about careful investigation.
We need to keep in mind that full-time public prosecutors are an innovation from the late 19th century. The system was not designed for such officials. It was designed for private prosecutors, appointed by grand juries, not public officials who have asserted undue control over grand juries. ("We can indict a ham sandwich!")
We get the justice we pay for and vote for. The fault is ours.
Max Sped
“It’s a downside only if you think winning is everything,” Strickland said. “And winning is not everything.”
…………………………….
We should have a state law declaring the Primary Duty of ever Prosecuting Attorney is to seek “JUSTICE” – there should be penalties for prosecutors who do not conduct themselves accordingly.
A. Bryant
A federal prison is too good for John Bradley (appointed by gov. Perry) and Judge Anderson. They should go to Polunsky Unit in Livingston, Texas where they can experience temperatures of 127% and eat food that looks like dog vomit.