Innocent citizens wrongfully convicted

After winning the Democratic nomination for governor, candidate Jim Davis apologized to two Florida citizens who had served prison time for crimes they did not commit. Davis apologized for not supporting a compensation bill when he was serving in the Legislature. His apology touched on but one of the issues that should be on the public agenda in light of the exonerations of innocent citizens who have been wrongfully convicted.

Those citizens number more than a few. A recent American Bar Association report showed that since 1973, there has been one exoneration for every three executions in Florida. It is time for political leaders to respond with action to the danger of wrongful convictions. We should think closely and carefully about how best to manage our system's imperfections and guard against future wrongful convictions. We can do this by asking four questions:

How can we best identify those who have a bona fide claim to innocence and allow them to demonstrate their innocence? Currently, prisoners petition for the right to have DNA testing performed on evidence that may exonerate them (or, for that matter, incriminate them further). This requires litigation and is, at bottom, a wasteful exercise.
In Virginia, Gov. Mark Warner learned of problems with wrongful convictions and ordered testing of available case-related biological evidence. Five innocent citizens who were unjustly incarcerated were identified; their combined sentences totaled 91 years in prison. This led former FBI Director William Sessions to make the following common-sense observation: "All across the United States . . . they should cough up those evidence lockers, clean them out, test them. So it costs $1,000. So what? If in fact DNA at any time can establish that the person charged is not the correct person, we should pay attention to it."

How should a program to support the claims to innocence be organized and funded? Today, the burden of communicating, screening and analyzing the claims of prisoners to actual innocence is carried almost entirely by the small staff of the Florida Innocence Initiative, a nonprofit corporation that solicits pro bono lawyers to handle the cases once they are screened. Funding comes from foundations and other private donations, without public support - even though the state has a moral obligation to ensure that we are not imprisoning innocent people. Although this work is of substantial benefit to the state - eliminating a number of claims through careful screening, facilitating the pro bono work of volunteer attorneys, and ultimately freeing the state from the costs of imprisoning citizens who should not be in prison - there has been no state support for the Florida Innocence Initiative.

How should those who are exonerated be compensated? Virtually everyone would agree that the state owes compensation to a citizen who has been wrongfully deprived of his liberty. Since Florida is committed to the payment of full and fair compensation for the taking of property, there is no principled argument for denial of full compensation when the state takes away an innocent citizen's liberty.

The most important issue is the fourth: How can we learn from these exonerations in order to improve the truth-finding function of our justice system? Barry Scheck, one of the leading authorities on wrongful conviction, poses an important question: Just as society requires a careful investigation by the National Transportation Safety Board whenever there is a train wreck or plane crash, isn't it logical that we should investigate each of the cases where we know that the justice system got it wrong?

We should investigate wrongful convictions for the same reasons that we investigate transportation accidents: We don't want to see them happen again. When we look at the failures to arrive at the truth, we have the opportunity to examine all the steps along the way and to enact legal reforms, establish educational programs or institute disciplinary action as may be indicated.

The North Carolina Actual Innocence Commission is an excellent model. Established by the chief justice of the North Carolina Supreme Court in 2002, it is tasked with “[making] recommendations which reduce or eliminate the possibility of the wrongful conviction of an innocent person.” Like North Carolina, Florida could easily set up an inexpensive commission made up of a cross section of citizens, including law enforcement officials, which could obtain competent assistance with a relatively small expenditure. Perhaps candidates for public office, particularly for governor and attorney general and regardless of partisan loyalties, will be stirred to remedy the danger of wrongful convictions that we've neglected for so long. After all, by neglecting our mistakes, we are sentencing ourselves to repeat them.

Report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)