This post is about justice. More accurately, it is about the betrayal of justice—absolutely and without doubt, the most tragic, most egregious, most heartbreaking betrayal of justice one could possibly imagine.
And just who is responsible for this horrific miscarriage of justice? None other than the one institution that is supposed to be the very embodiment of justice, that bulwark of equality and fairness, the highest authority on the law of the land, the United States Supreme Court.
In a mind-numbing 5-4 decision, the court overturned a $14 million judgment against the late Harry Connick, Sr., and the New Orleans district attorney’s office for the wrongful conviction of John Thompson in the 1984 murder of a New Orleans hotel executive.
In 1985, Thompson was convicted of the Dec. 6, 1984, murder of Ray Liuzza and was sentenced to death by a New Orleans jury. The only problem was, he didn’t do it and the district attorney’s office knew he didn’t do it.
Almost 50 years ago, in 1963, in the landmark Brady v. Maryland decision, the Supreme Court ruled that prosecutors had a duty to make available to defendants all exculpatory evidence—evidence that would benefit or exonerate a defendant.
Thompson’s trial was in 1985, more than two decades after Brady and still the prosecuting attorney in Connick’s office deliberately and knowingly withheld vital evidence so much in Thompson’s favor that he could never have been convicted had the jury been given access to it.
Crime lab data had shown that Liuzza’s killer had type B blood, while Thompson was type O. Moreover, an eyewitness described the assailant as a black man who was six feet tall with close-cropped hair. Thompson is 5-foot-8 and sported a bushy Afro at the time.
The jury never learned of either of these facts because the prosecutor chose not to turn the information over to Thompson’s defense attorney.
It wasn’t until the assistant district attorney who prosecuted Thompson was dying of cancer that he confessed his transgression to an associate who kept the secret to himself for another five years before finally divulging it.
Meanwhile, Thompson had six separate dates with the executioner. In each case, he was fortunate enough to get a stay as the Louisiana Innocence Project worked fervently to clear him before his execution.
It took 18 years before Thompson walked out of the Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola a free man.
He sued District Attorney Connick, father of entertainer Harry Connick, Jr., and the district attorney’s office and was awarded a $14 million judgment—$1 million for each year he spent on death row. That judgment was upheld by a federal judge and a U.S. court of appeals panel. The district attorney’s office appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court and the high court agreed to hear arguments.
Despite the deliberate and conscious decision by the assistant D.A. to withhold the exculpatory evidence, Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the majority in the decision late last month, described the case as a “single incident” where mistakes were made. He added that Thompson “did not prove a pattern of similar violations” that would justify holding the district attorney’s office liable for the wrongdoing.
Wait. What? Single incident? Mistakes were made? No pattern of similar violations?
It is incredulous that Thomas, with the concurrence of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy, and Samuel A. Alito, Jr., could put such foolishness in writing when Thompson’s attorneys clearly cited several similar cases in New Orleans in which key evidence was concealed from defense attorneys. Moreover, Thompson’s lawyers showed to the high court that no fewer than four prosecutors in Connick’s office knew about the blood test and never came forward.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in her dissent that she read in the courtroom, said the court was shielding prosecutors from “flagrant” misconduct that nearly cost an innocent man his life.
“John Thompson spent 14 years isolated on death row before the truth came to light,” Ginsburg said. “He was innocent of the crimes that sent him to prison, and prosecutors dishonored their obligation to prevent the true facts to the jury.”
Thanks to the narrow-mindedness of the Roberts court, it now becomes even more difficult for a wrongfully convicted individual to seek damages from prosecutors who deliberately withhold exculpatory evidence.
The National Innocence Project, co-founded by attorney Garry Scheck and Peter Neufeld, has thus far gained the freedom of more than 300 wrongfully convicted individuals. Many of those convictions were overturned as the result of the emergence of DNA as an evidentiary tool.
Which brings us to another story of area concern:
Last November, District Attorney Mike Harson of the 15th JDC (Lafayette Parish) went on record as opposing an Angola inmate’s request for a DNA test that he said would clear him of a 1983 rape case. Harson even appealed a judge’s decision granting the request of William Williams, Jr. after a New Jersey nonprofit organization, Centurion Ministries, offered to pay for the testing.
That story ran in the Baton Rouge Advocate last Nov. 21. The very next day, the Advocate ran another story that a Houston man had been cleared of rape….by DNA tests.
The argument used most often by prosecutors in opposing DNA tests is that it disrespects the victims.
Sorry, but we ain’t buying that. Not for a minute. Nothing disrespects the victim more than convicting the wrong person (who is also victim, is he not?) while leaving the real criminal free to commit further carnage.
And someone please explain why a man would request a DNA test if he was, in fact, guilty? Wouldn’t the test be counter-productive to the accused if it only reinforced his guilt?
Mr. Harson, your argument is weak, lame, ill-conceived, disingenuous, and illegitimate. What’s more, it’s downright insulting to the intelligence of anyone who can read and reason for himself.
But it might qualify you as a viable candidate for the U.S. Supreme Court should a vacancy occur.
Republicans a most evil star chamber in our midst.
here’s the U.S. Supreme Court’s
Majority Opinion and Dissent in
the case referred to above of
Thompson vs. Connick/Connick
v. Thompson.
Click to access 09-571.pdf
Happy reading!
Sincerely,
Hardy Parkerson, J.D.
Retired Lawyer after 41 years at the Bar
Lake Charles, LA
Mr. Parkerson,
When an individual falls into the legal “holodeck” as described by Ms. Linda Kennedy, fellow disbarred lawyer and activist, what can they do?
I survived a violent crime only to be heaved into a fictitious, manipulative court vortex all by myself, an innocent victim.
Regretfully, you are disbarred, but I value your counsel. I NEED guidance in order to survive the court system. I cannot do this all alone, my health is in jeopardy.
Thank you for your kindness,
Lisa
http://ceyseau.net/
http://whoneedsahypocrit.blogtownhall.com/
John Thompson is being Wrongly Treated by Government!
When the Judicial, Executive, and Legislative Branches of Government Fail, the will of the People is the Final Check and Balance!
It is truly shocking that President Barack Obama, the Congressional Black Caucus, Black lawyers, etc., etc., remain silent about this and/or other issues to where law abiding U.S. born descendants of slaves have been and remain to be egregiously violated by government.
Sincerely,
Michael L. Lofton
And no one in the prosecutor’s office is indicted…..
I know this is an old article but am just reading this today. I happen to be the victim of William Williams. I understand that you are upset about the district attorney not wanting to allow the DNA testing but we were confident we had the right person in jail as there was fingerprint evidence. It strikes me as quite unfair that articles are written about injustice and yet when the victim is proven right you can’t find an entry anywhere. The DNA in this case actually showed he was my attacker even after 31 years! You make a comment that why would any guilty man ask for a DNA test if he was guilty? I’ll tell you why, because he has a life sentence and nothing to lose but to keep the courts busy.
[…] I read in the NY Times one of these related stories, I had my latest example. John Thompson, a 22-yr-old black man from New Orleans, falsely was convicted of robbery and murder and sent […]