1. Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2018
Convicting the Innocent, Ch Mistakes by judges - Exonerations - Summary
Feedback:
Penny Beerntsen and Katie Monroe
Questions before we start?
For next week: come with questions about topics we did not cover in enough detail, such as official immunity and compensation
Catch-up from last time:
From slide 12, eyewitness ID gone bad
Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2018

2. Special guest by phone, in class, end of March (date TBA), Lyle May
He will call in, answer your questions.
Give questions to your TA in class this week. I will compile them on Friday and send them by US postal mail.
Some writing by or about Lyle May
education-reform
Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2018

3. Review of the stories and videos on the class web site:
VA and AZ death row conditions have improved from bad to better…
what SHOULD be the conditions?
How about LWOP?
Juvenile LWOP?
Is it good or bad that Lyle May is getting a college degree?
Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2018

4. From last time: Problems with trials
Constitutional right: a “fair” trial, not a “perfect” trial
Also note: if your lawyer has the opportunity to raise and issue, but chooses not to, that is fair. It could be that he / she makes a mistake, and you pay for it, but it was a fair process.
Discussion / questions about that?
Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2018

5. Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2018
From the NYT, 2/27/18 Date of signature: 2/14/16 Suspect photo: 1/14/16 Filler photos: 3/4/16 to 3/7/16 Conclusion: the detective is guilty of perjury. He made the line up come out “right” by falsifying it.
Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2018

6. Why do appeals courts defer to the original trial?
Garrett’s point, maybe a surprise: innocent people, post-conviction, present evidence of their innocence only to have appeals courts routinely deny relief. Why?
Presumption of innocence (where that applies) > presumption of guilt once the trial is over and you are in prison
Finality, concept of endless appeals
More importantly: deference to the jury
Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2018

7. Appeals court not in the courtroom during the trial
They have only the record to go by
If the original judge and original jury were bamboozled or mistaken, and they saw all the evidence, why would the appeals court be different?
Concept of “harmless error” – mistakes happen. But would they have changed the outcome of the trial? Appeals court has to make this call. They often note errors, but rule that these were “harmless”.
Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2018

8. Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2018
Herrera v. Collins (1993)
Let’s assume “for the sake of argument” that an inmate could present “truly persuasive” evidence of their actual innocence.
Such evidence would be enough for an exoneration.
No inmate in US history has ever been able to do this. Ever.
Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2018

9. Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2018
Reforms
NC Innocence Inquiry Commission: still the only one of its kind, nationally.
But it has generated just 10 exonerations in 10 years.
Eyewitness line-ups, forensics, so many areas for improvement, no single magic bullet solution
“Conviction Integrity Units” within the DA’s office: internal investigations in Dallas, Brooklyn, a few other DA’s offices have generated many exonerations. But it’s up to the DA.
Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2018

10. Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2018
Why do we accept this?
Say there are 1,000,000 felonies per year (roughly true)
If 4 percent are innocent (roughly true, at least for death penalty), that means 40,000 innocents are convicted each year
Imagine the US Postal Service or the Social Security Administration delivered checks to the wrong address 4 percent of the time… No one would stand for it. Members of Congress would fix it.
What’s the difference? Discuss.
Baumgartner, POLI 203, Spring 2018