JAILHOUSE SNITCHES: LONG OVERDUE CAUTION IN CALIFORNIA

A state panel Monday urged tighter standards on the use of jailhouse informants in criminal cases, noting the danger of manufactured ``confessions'' from cellmates. Saying the use of such informants is a leading cause of wrongful convictions, the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice unanimously recommended statewide safeguards that would require, among other measures, independent corroboration before informants are used.

The recommendations fall far short of strict rules enacted in Los Angeles County, where the criminal justice system was stung by a scandal involving jailhouse informants in the 1980s. In Santa Clara County, a ranking prosecutor says the guidelines largely represent policies already in place, but one defense lawyer Monday called the county procedures a ``disgrace.'' The recommendation by the panel, which includes Santa Clara County District Attorney George Kennedy, comes amid a brewing controversy over the use of jailhouse informants in the South Bay.

The use of jailhouse informants locally was examined as part of ``Tainted Trials, Stolen Justice,'' a series of Mercury News articles that have highlighted a variety of issues raising the small but significant risk of wrongful conviction. One case that the newspaper looked at, the murder trial of Roy Garcia, ended in an acquittal last month after the prosecution relied in part on the testimony of an informant who had been found not credible in another case.

And earlier this month, the Texas inmate sharing a cell with Tyrone Hamel, who was charged in the 1988 killing of a Palo Alto lawyer, was called to testify at a preliminary hearing that he heard Hamel confess.

Because such confessions are easily manufactured, and because inmates have so much incentive to curry favor with authorities, the state commission is urging statewide rules. The commission wants the Legislature to require that juries be told that corroborating evidence must accompany a jailhouse informant's testimony about either the crime or the existence of special circumstances that could lead to the death penalty. The commission also called on district attorneys to adopt policies requiring a supervisor to approve the decision to call a jailhouse informant, to maintain a database of informants within the office, and to record all interviews with inmates. ``I believe these recommendations are a step forward in terms of the most egregious situations'' involving informants, said the commission's executive director, Gerald F. Uelmen.

He said many district attorney's offices throughout the state have no written policy at all. The commission report credited Santa Clara County for having a written policy, though that document is far less elaborate than that of Los Angeles County, where jailhouse informants may not be used without the approval of a committee of top officials within the office. David Tomkins, an assistant district attorney in Santa Clara County, said he and other supervisors dislike and discourage the use of informants. He said prosecutors in his office must be satisfied an informant is credible and that the informant's testimony is vital to the case. The office has developed a computer system to track and identify witnesses in cases, but that database is not yet complete and some attorneys use it more diligently than others. Tomkins said the office ``is reviewing'' the decision to use the Texas inmate at the preliminary hearing in the Hamel case. He was arrested after DNA tied him to the slaying of Gretchen Burford, a case that went unsolved for years. Tomkins said no decision has been made on whether to call the inmate as a witness if the case goes to trial.

But last month Deputy District Attorney Javier Alcala called inmate Timothy Villalba as a witness in the Garcia trial, despite doubts about Villalba's credibility. Villalba, hoping for parole while serving 25-years to life for murder, contended that Garcia had implicated himself in the 1998 killing of Deborah Gregg while he and Garcia were in custody together. Villalba was already ruled not credible in another case, after he testified in 2002 that he heard another inmate -- Glen ``Buddy'' Nickerson -- confess his part in a notorious 1984 drug-related double homicide. A federal judge ruled Villalba ``entirely without credibility,'' and overturned Nickerson's conviction. Wednesday, Garcia's attorney, Doron Weinberg, said he was ``outraged'' by any suggestion that Santa Clara County had model standards on the use of informants. ``Any policy that would permit the testimony of somebody like Villalba . . . is not a policy worth talking about.''

The commission earlier this year approved recommendations on protecting against mistaken identification and on wrongful confessions. Those recommendations led to bills that ultimately were vetoed by the governor. Nevertheless, Uelmen said Monday he was ``optimistic'' that the new report -- which carried unanimous support -- would be enacted and that he ``also remains optimistic that the governor will give a second look at the earlier measures as well.''

Report here




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