Calls for Change in Wake of Wrongful Convictions
The Texas Tribune analyzed 86 overturned convictions, finding that in nearly one quarter of those cases courts ruled that prosecutors made mistakes that often contributed to the wrong outcome. This multi-part series explores the causes and consequences of prosecutorial errors and whether reforms might prevent future wrongful convictions.
There’s no balancing of the books when you lose two and a half decades of your life to prison, Michael Morton says. He can’t make up for missing his son Eric’s childhood while he was stuck behind bars for a murder he didn’t commit.
“We’re starting from ...
Comments (16)
gypsy314 ne
If they get it wrong I say make them serve every day that the wrong served that is fair and justice
H A
"but also that errors in his case allowed the real murderer to remain free to hurt others." Really? Like what? Micheal signed the check that was supposedly in the stolen purse, the credit card has never been explained fully. Was it used or not? The note the credit card report was on never said anything about Christine or Micheal Morton. In '87 after the trial Micheal told a reporter that his son told him, his therapist, and the lady who called Don Wood about the supposed story from Eric, his grandmother. So to say that the defense didn't know about any of this "evidence" is really hard to swallow. Even though the media shoves these half stories down the readers throats every chance they get. John Bradly had the reporter ready to take the stand, with his notes, to tell everyone what else Micheal said. Sadly Bradly failed once again and never allowed a real investigation to take place into any of the matters of the case. Instead he signed a exoneration paper and allowed a bias team of lawyers to seek out the "truth" by deposing county employees with half truths and incomplete facts in order to exploit a public and media that becomes "opinionated" and outraged before they even finish reading a headline.
Here is a real bit of truthful info. Micheal Morton, after being told that his wife was killed, asked Jim Boutwell if she was "beat up or shot". Then later on when he was asked if any of his numerous guns were missing, he asked if his .45 was missing. It just so happened to be the only one missing. The interesting thing is Norwood was arrested in Tennessee not to long after the murder in possession of that very gun with serials to match. Now, I think it's interesting that Micheal without ever having been back into the house after the murder was so quick to ask if that gun had been taken. Also remember that none of the jewelry in plain sight we taken. The only other evidence we know about Norwood is from the bandanna. But interestingly there has never been a official report as to what type of DNA was on that bandanna. Add in the affair Micheal was having at the time and you've got an different story from this reform BS that the media swoons over and writes about ad nauseum. FYI that part about the gun is protected under the gag order, so you wont be reading about it till the Norwood trial.
Queue Phillip Baker's gibberish laden rant.
Debbie Zimm
When you are indicted, a piece of paper is generated that says, “The State of Texas vs...”. Wrongful convictions are the responsibility of the State of Texas, period. The cops, DA's and Judges can run around and play he said, she said, but they all represent the State and act in concert to execute false convictions.
The State and really the public have little or no regard for a person's life, freedom or pursuit of happiness (as long as it is not their own). Our society responds more to money. It is difficult to mount a federal section 1983 lawsuit directly against the State due to some Judge's interpretation of the wording... If this were changed and individuals could sue the State for big bucks, bleed green, watch how fast the State fixes the problem. Really $80,000 minus the cost of a bed at the hotel del Texas is nothing to the State. And those that claim “isolated instances” have nothing to fear, right? Currently everybody is sitting around playing paddy whack and there is NO ACTION.
Remember Judges and the State Bar are paid by the State and behave as such. Texas criminal defense attorneys as a group are ridiculously spineless.
These individual cases have been regurgitated to the point of nausea. It's great press, great drama. Let's see some macro reporting. This county had XX felony indictments in 2011, XX plead guilty, XX were dismissed pretrial, XX went to trial and XX won. Then we can see trends across counties, across years. Numbers don't lie, people do, especially about numbers when they are making a point.
Phillip Baker
Thank you, Mr. Anderson. You are Ken Anderson's son, are you not? Or maybe his brother? Doesn't your email carry an IP from San Francisco? either way, both of you have posted here and on Grits several times, always with the same denial of truth. At least now you are not hiding behind "anonymous". I get it, you are defending your father/brother/? . In the same place, I expect I'd do the same. But...
Point: That credit card was in Christine Morton's name, and somebody tried to use it days after the trial (at a business on north Burnet Rd in Austin, as I recall)
Point: That check was initially suspicious, but turned out to be a gift for Eric from a relative. It had Mike's name on it because he endorsed it to cash it.
Point: A Wilco sheriff's deputy found that bandana originally, but decided on his own that it was not relevant. Christine's brother insisted it be taken as evidence, since it was found about a 100 yds from the Morton house in a construction area.
Point: Bradley- by his own admission, at the urging of his "mentor", Anderson- fought testing that bandana for 7 years. Why? He said the results would "only muddle" the facts. The retort from those despised defense lawyers was, "Why? Truth clarifies." The defense was paying for the test, so money was not the issue. So why did Bradley fight so hard to keep that testing from happening?
Point: Neighbors told investigators that a green van had been suspiciously cruising the area of the Morton house in the weeks/days before the killing. That information was dismissed as irrelevant by Wilco law enforcement and not disclosed to the defense.
Point: Ken Anderson and Sheriff Boutwell focused exclusively on Mike Morton, a man with no criminal history, no motive, no evidence linking him the to crime.
Point: All those supposed "facts" about statements by Morton in the hours and days after the murder are not substantiated. One fact that IS substantiated is that Anderson at the last minute pulled the chief investigator off the witness list and replaced him with the ever pliable Boutwell. That kept the defense from getting to look at the entire investigative report, described as "about 4 inches thick". More abundant evidence the DA held but did not disclose exculpatory evidence- a serious breach of ethics, moral, law. Yet this man is still a sitting judge! Great, now every case he handled will likely be appealed. Great use of public monies.
And you left out some "facts" asserted at trial- that Morton was wearing a wet suit at the time of the killling; that the time of death was earlier than when Morton could prove he was at work- by distoring the Med Examiners testimony over and over; that Morton was enraged by his wife's declining him sex the night of his birthday; that Morton masturbated on the blood soaked bed after coming home from the interrogation by Boutwell's people.
-There was NO evidence to support the wet suit theory
-Morton's coworkers backed his claim to have been there at the time of the murder. But DA Ken Anderson had Medical Examiner Bayardo testify about the stomach contents of the victim , which Bayardo testified under oath showed the time of the murder later than 5:30am, a time when Morton was at work. Worse, he lied repeatedly to the jury about Bayardo's conclusions, claiming they proved she was murdered earlier, when Mike Morton had not yet left for work. Anderson used that untruth many times, but especially in his summing up. Bayardo himself has disputed the distorted use of his testimony.(Too little, too late) Mind you, the jurors said that the evidence setting the time of death was critical to the conviction.
Point: The DNA results were, indeed, officially recorded. On that bandana was found Christine Morton's blood, some of her hair, and the DNA from an unknown man- but NO DNA from Mike Morton. To say otherwise would be considered a lie by most reasonable people.
Point: How would investigators know about a conversation between a couple about sex the night before, when one was dead? Explain that, dutiful,, denying relative. And what was the basis for the lurid masturbation claim? Again, only Morton himself would know that, unless hidden cameras were in that room. If so, produce the footage. Otherwise we must conclude that the accusation was pulled out of thin air, deliberately by Anderson and with full knowledge of its impact, to mislead the jury.
You two will continue to deny the truth, that MIchael Morton was deliberately framed by DA Anderson, aided and betted later by John Bradley's years of fighting testing of that bandana. The foreman of that jury stated he now realizes that were duped.
What Ken Anderson did was horrific. It was also part of the general culture in Wilco at the time and right up to today- forget justice, get convictions, no matter what cost. That culture of corruption is being dismantled bit by bit. Bradley was defeated for re-election. This coming court of inquiry will help sort out Anderson's actions and motivations in going after Morton without following any other leads. This was neither the first nor last time a Wilco DA withheld evidence and lied to get a conviction. That went on right up to Bradley's time as DA. Will the toothless, impotent State Bar finally be shamed into taking action?
Enough of my gibberish-laden ranting, except for one last thing: I say Ken Anderson has the blood of my murdered wife, Debra Masters Baker, on his hands. He framed an innocent man who was imprisoned for almost 25 years, and left the real killer on the streets, to kill again. And again. Sorry, KA, if these "inconvenient truths" get you all riled up and angry, but believe me I can match your anger in spades. His deliberate actions devastated three families at minimum. Neither Anderson nor Bradley should be allowed a law license, and the Judicial Qualification Commission- if it had the teeth, inclination and integrity to do so- would throw Anderson off that bench forever.
Phillip Baker
To Ms. Zimm- When you walk into a court room, exactly what does the "State of Texas" look like? No, the "State" is not there, anymore than the Queen of England appears in every court room doing Her Majesty's business. Live people, most well-intentioned and honest, act in the name of Texas. When they cheat the rules, they are the ones who are responsible for wrongful conviction. And those wrongful convictions are not all about prosecutorial misconduct, just error. But with Morton, 46 men have now been exonerated for crimes they did not commit. Over 20% were overturned because of DA misconduct. Others were not so lucky- they were executed by our indecently active death machine. And we know of at least 3 innocent men who were killed unjustly.
As for the numbers you want, just read the other portions of this series.
Finally, it has been "spineless defense lawyers" who have fought to proved the innocence of these exonerees. So I say, we need more defense lawyers, because these cases are merely the tip of the iceberg. There are thousands more. Without defense lawyers and - yes- the ACLU and other groups who protect the Constitution- the corruption of our broken "justice" system would be far worse.
Lisa Conn
Re H A:
How do you know so much about this case? I'm very interested to find out where you got your information that is "covered by the gag order"? I'm pretty sure we've read your comments before and once again, let me state that you have no right to cast any stones about my family. At least get your information right.
H A
RE: Lisa Conn
I get them from the same type of people that Henry Prejean or Doyle Hobbs, er, I mean the Wilco Watchdog does. You know, Jana Duty's employees. And since when did I ever insult your family? Mr. Baker continues to rant about government and the evils within to my disgust. I'm simply offering what I see as real truth.You have to admit Morton lied as long as he could about the check, probably at the urging of Mr. Scheck, only to be questioned about it by the AG, then fully admitting to signing it without straining to remember as questionable motives. And his statements about his son telling him about the murder. He has shown questionable character and the fact that people just take everything he says as truth is "eating away at me like a rust".
Gemma Lina
Trolls; don't feed them.
H A
Liars; don't listen to them.
Lisa Conn
Gemma,
Of course you're right. I know better, especially when trolls have such WRONG info. I also know how to respect a Gag Order.
H A
Thank you Mr.Baker. You proved once again that you are still stuck on the lies of Berry Scheck. And I'm sure every word that man speaks is 100% true or zen or Buddhist. But he happens to be the same hired gun that has allowed countless murders to walk free while lining his pockets with millions of dollars.
Point: You only know what what other people tell you. The credit card was reported multiple times as being used in SA. As in the report to court offered by Slimeball Scheck and Co. Now you say it was Austin? hmm.. ok. What you forget is it, the "evidence", is a small piece of paper that says we have the card. Nothing about any name associated with the case is on it. No staple marks, no tape... it was never real evidence because it had nothing to do with the case. And even if it was, then the WCSO has some explaining to do. The DA doesn't control everything.
Point: The check was never suspicious. WCSO pulled bank records and nothing suspicious was uncovered. This was another lie that Micheal played up with his lawyers to try and show that there was proof of evidence being withheld. FACT is Micheal knew very well from the start he signed it. HE allowed his lawyers to lie to the court about its validity as "withheld evidence".
Point: Since when did anyone think there was anything related to Micheal Morton was on the bandanna? I've never heard any claim that there ever was. Microscopic blood was found. No one without lab equipment could have known anything was on there. And we still don't know what type of DNA was on the bandanna from Norwood. That still isn't what set Morton free.
Point: The green van report has been looked at by new prosecution. Let it be known that looking through DMV records nothing can be shown linking Norwood to the van. What would a vehicle description with no detailed description of the person driving it prove to the defense. Would they argue there is reasonable doubt based on something like this? That's silly.
Point: Oh, now Bradly is telling the truth when he said (where is this quoted from?) that Anderson said to fight the testing? But I thought he was evil and a liar?
Point: Ken Anderson said that he thought they arrested Morton too soon. So that's way off base to say that Anderson had tunnel vision. Oh and if you really squeeze the facts, really, really hard in 1987, how would you, Chief Inspector Jacques Clouseau, find anyone else that would be a likely suspect? I mean if you can ask one of you blogger friends who's IP address posted a comment, who knows what crimes you could solve.
Point: ALL those FACTS are substantiated by what the Sheriff testified about. They didn't know Norwood would be arrested with the same .45 Morton asked about the day of the murder at the time of trial. Anderson at the urging of the Sheriff decided to let him the Sheriff testify. You can make all the claims about strategy you want, but that's strained conspiracy at best.
Point: Bayardo wanted to testify at the trial. His testimony implied that she died no later then 5am and when further asked about his opinion he changed it to 1am. Him not being a doctor had to use what he had. Arguing time of death base on a doctors opinion seems standard in a trial.
Why don't you address Mortons interview in '87? Doesn't fit into your world of evil so you deny it, right?
Here's another bone for you to bite. Harle order was so poorly written that everything was thrown out except the order to produce the original statements Morton gave to the detectives the day of the murder. Rusty should see right through that. And that 80 year old lawyer that has been washed up for years has even called the new judge to ask for "an extension" from the September 11th COI date. He and the rest of that trash team don't even know they aren't playing any role since his friend Judge Harle is done presiding. I bet he thinks the first Bush is on office.
You continue to imply this garbage offered from Sheck as fact. Truth is they aren't. He has lied to get what he wants. What does the public and media want to believe? The press would love nothing more then to destroy a Judge and gullible, dumbed down American people can't tell fact from Twilight books. They just want to see blood.
I bet when 25 years later when Berry Scheck lies to a juror about key facts, he's more inclined to say something like "I was duped".
I think it's hilarious that you think Ken Anderson is writing these posts. He doesn't care what you think. Not one bit. He knows what happened and you don't. You should be focused on you Probation job and stop spewing your vile on the internet. You think the world is evil and comments like, "When you walk into a court room, exactly what does the "State of Texas" look like? No, the "State" is not there, anymore than the Queen of England appears in every court room doing Her Majesty's business." make you sound absolutely insane. Which is of course what you are. I'm sorry for your loss but I wish that you would be able to rise above such childish things.
In closing, not everyone is the world thinks the way you do. Not everyone that posts other opinions or points out facts you've ignored is a relative of Anderson. There are people that can see what small minded people cant. Get a life and just stop.
Phillip Baker
HA, if your commentary were not so ironically funny I could not have made it through to the end. Now who is making "gibberish laden rants"? You accuse Barry Scheck of lying over and over, yet fail to offer even a single example. That Scheck has been involved in very high profile cases is hardly news, but in truth most of his career has been in teaching law for over 30 years. But enough of that- Barry Scheck need no defense from me. His work speaks for itself. you just seem to have a problem with the existence of defense lawyers. What a small, strange world you inhabit.
You're right, the credit card was used in San Antonio. But Mike Morton was in jail at the time. Christine's purse was stolen, then her card was used days after the murder. That should have raised many red flags to investigators actually looking for the truth. It didn't; they already had made up their minds.
Neighbors reported seeing a green van near the Morton house several times in the days leading to the murder. Someone "casing the house" should have been of great interest to objective investigators. But , of course, they were not objective. Back then, law enforcement and criminal justice existed in an incestuous world in Wilco. Anderson and Boutwell had breakfast each morning and talked shop. Another view is that they ate and got their stories straight. It would not surprise anyone in most small towns to know that their sheriff and the local DA hung out together. They did and still do. But it is also true that deals are cut, pleas made, and story lines concocted while they hang out.
Funny, that seems to be exactly what Bradley did when all this broke loose- he summoned all the principle players on his side to a closed-door meeting. He claims they were just discussing the case (reportedly at very high volume in very angry tomes). Another view is that he was desperately trying to get all those stories lined up like he wanted.
As to that bandana, the fact is that it had the blood and hair of Christine Morton on it, plus the blood of some unknown man, but no blood from Michael Morton. And you do not see the blazing significance of that? Then you are the only one on this planet who misses the obvious.
Try again about Bayardo. He testified that stomach contents showed the murder happened after 5:30am. Read the record. It was Anderson who lied repeatedly about that conclusion, misleading the jury on a crucial point. By the way, Bayardo IS a doctor.
Anderson and Boutwell decided right off that the quickest means to a conviction- and another notch in their scores- was Mike Morton. How would they have suspected anybody else?? By basic, honest, real police work. Who was driving that van? That is was not registered to Norwood only means he did not own it. Company truck? Borrowed? It would have been pretty easy to track it down and answer some questions- if they had tried. Even in 1988 the blood and hair on that bandana would have shown the presence of a third party. Who tried to use that card? Why did Boutwell's investigators not even bother to try to find out?
Sorry, HA, that your beloved (brother/father/whatever) is being outted as the corrupt official he really was. Anderson claims he cannot remember anything about the case, since it was so long ago. Yet he is absolutely certain he did nothing wrong. Bit of a contradiction there, don't you think. Anderson has probably done many good things in his career. He will be remembered only as the rapacious liar who deliberately, knowingly, and unjustly put a man in prison for almost 25 years, left a murderer free to continue killing, and bears responsibility for the ensuing murder of Debra Baker and likely others. Try as you might to cast slurs and fabricate contradictions, those are the real facts. Real justice now requires that he be thrown off that bench, have his law license yanked forever, and spend the rest of his sorry life in prison for his crimes.
And that, HA, is all the time I have to waste on you.
H A
Q: Now who is making "gibberish laden rants"?
A: What is Phillip Baker?
CORRECT!
If you could actually think clearly maybe this wouldn't be so hard to understand. Everything you consider evidence or something pointing to another person has only been told to you by an advocate that decide to fight this in the media. So you know nothing about the credit card. The card was never canceled and the bills were paid by Micheal. Your timeline is off, not surprising. Micheal was arrested but was out during the trial and the months before. A piece of paper that says "we have the card" does not mean it was Christine's or Micheal's. The card was not and will never be real evidence in this case.
You said that Anderson and Boutwell had coffee each morning...blah, blah, hysterical rant, blah... thats just more Scheck reading a book Anderson wrote and spinning it into something that is beyond ridiculous even by your standards.
If you want to quote the Watchdog feel free. But I don't trust those County Attorney folks. All they did was try and defame Bradley by making that rumor up and perpetuate it. I see you drank that one right up, since it fit your predetermined narrative of what you wanted to have occurred, a new reality was born.
Now to the bandanna. There has never been any official report that says what exactly was found DNA wise on the bandanna pertaining to Norwood. So please stop kidding yourself by saying it was his blood. And once again, why are you stating that Micheal's blood could have been on it? No one else ever said or thought that. Your mind is slipping into more conspiracy.
I know Bayardo was a doctor. If you read the sentence again it would appear that I was referring to Anderson as only having his testimony and opinion to draw from in terms of time of death. The defence paid two people to say something to the contrary. Guess the Dr., having asked to testify himself made a more compelling argument. You do know the defense did have a chance to cross examine him? By the way, I should have used "he" instead of "him". Sorry for the confusion.
You don't know what Anderson and Boutwell were thinking, ever, at all. You need to cut that crap out. Don't you think the AG of Texas has looked into the van just like they did with the check? Nothing came from the van and nothing ever would have in 1987 or in 2012. You know that the defense also had a detective that talked to the neighbors and nothing seems to have come from that. Oh that's right, Allison and White still wont say what they did know and have in their case file. I bet those two think it's time to pay back the student that beat them in a case 25 years ago. And what better way then denying ever knowing anything about Eric or a van or anything for that matter. After all, who is going to believe Anderson after his name has been tarnished. They just went along with the circus. But you know, Bradley had the chance to ACTUALLY investigate the "loose ends" in the case. He chose to simply exonerate Morton almost zero questions asked and sell Anderson down the river. Had Bradley actually done his job and looked at these points you vigorously argue about then he might still be DA and you'd know what happened. Or maybe not. But he chose to allow Scheck and Co to spin facts, present half truths and not show actual court records to the deposed in order to craft the frivolous "report to court". The fact that you can't see any of this for what it's worth is troubling but not shocking.
Please stop acting like the media when saying Anderson didn't remember ANYTHING. That's so far from the truth that it almost makes me want to puke on you and the rest of the vile media that copy and pastes news stories without hesitation. The deposition reads a bit differently and the question asked were setup to make Anderson slip up. He didn't. Not because he was trying to hide anything but because 25 years later he couldn't be sure. He could have lied like Allison and White all day about what he remembered. But it appears he gave honest answers and that hurt him. Imagine honesty from a public servant. I know you can't.
Ken Anderson is more of a man then you will ever be.
Facts are proven, opinions are just that. Now keep your tales of black helicopters out of the light of day.
Lisa Conn
RE: H A
What is your interest in this case anyway? Why don't you tell us who you really are? We've posted our names and our relationships. What about you? You spew your incorrect information like you've been personally involved in this. It's obvious you have not. We have been involved in this since January 13, 1988 when my sister was brutally murdered. We believe the same monster killed Christine Morton and Debra Baker. His name is Mark Alan Norwood, not Michael Morton. For the record, we do not get our information from anyone in Jana Duty's office or the others you mentioned. We have spent countless hours with the police, the district attorney's offices, lawyers, etc. We have read every transcript and attended every hearing. This is our life. Why don't you get your own?
H A
I'm sorry you feel your opinion is worth more then mine. Now just for the record, I've known Ken Anderson for over 20 years. I no longer live in Wilco due to better opportunists out of state. I'm positive that he doesn't want me to be arguing with people about the case online. But the level of misreporting and promotion of only version of the story compels me to fire back in defense of someone I feel is one of the most upstanding, genuine, and honorable persons I have ever met.
I'm now under the impression that you think and feel every single preliminary accusation made against Anderson is true. Correct? I also think that you feel that anyone who has a different view of the Morton case is somehow against your family and in support of murders going free to ruin other lives and families. I'm not. What I am against is the promotion of wild accusations stemming from Mr. Alison, Mr. White, Micheal Morton, and Berry Scheck. They have manipulated the press so much that news articles are now saying that evidence that presumably was know by the defense (Eric's statement, see the pretrial transcript and Morton's interview with the Hill Country News) WOULD have kept Morton out of jail. As if it were proven fact and not their own opinion. When that crap ceases, I'll be happy to sit quietly and wait for the COI against my longtime friend. Where at least he'll be able to depose Morton, Alison, White and hopefully Sheck. I'm confident there will be some new revelations once he finely has a chance to ask them question of his own. I feel strongly that he will be found innocent of any wrong doing. He can't be blamed for lack of police work and impeccable note keeping by the investigators. And that there is where a good lawyer comes in to raise doubt about a case that is over 25 years old and is now missing two of the most important people, the Sheriff and the Judge.
In closing everything I have said is the truth. Except it if you will, but sadly, I feel you're both in such a place that you will never change you mind about Anderson's responsibility for your sister and wife's death. I feel awful that you have been living with this tragedy for so many years, but that does not excuse your and Mr. Bakers endless string of hate against someone that was trying to get it right based on what he had at the time. He lives in the same community you do. He has kids just like you. He has friends just like you. To say that he would willfully and knowingly frame a person for a crime just to close the case is simply wrong.
William Morton
Ok guys...enough "He said...she said."
Bottom line
#1 Mr. Morton's release from prison was highly publicized.
#2 Mr. Morton's exoneration of the crime was highly publicized.
#3 Mr. Anderson held a press conference admitting "We got it wrong."
#4 Mr. Morton's story has received national attention due to the subject matter.
#5 Mr. Morton received financial compensation from the state.
#6 Another man has been arrested for the crime.
Seems to me Mr. Morton has absolutely nothing to hide...his story is for all to see.
Just my 2 cents.