Danziger was convicted of the 1988 rape and murder of a young woman who managed a Pizza Hut in Austin, Texas. As she opened the store for business; she was tied up, raped, and shot in the head. Richard Danziger and Chris Ochoa, roommates at the time, worked at a nearby Pizza Hut. Some how they became the focus of the police investigation into the murder and were picked up by police and questioned separately. Following three days of interrogation Ochoa falsely confessed that he and Danziger committed the rape and murder. Ochoa pled guilty, taking full responsibility for the shooting, and testified against Danziger at a 1990 trial. Danziger maintained his innocence throughout, but was found guilty and was sentenced to life in prison.
Eight years later, Achim Marino, who was serving three life sentences in a Texas prison, confessed to the crime. He sent letters with detailed knowledge of the crime to then-Governor Bush, the police, the newspaper, and the district attorney. His letters went unanswered for two years even though police found items he had described. After a letter from Marino was made public, Ochoa and Danziger were able to get DNA tests, which excluded them and incriminated Marino. In 2001, Danziger and Ochoa were officially exonerated. By then, Danziger had been attacked in prison by inmates, kicked in the head, and sustained serious brain damage.
In their Op-Ed, the former jurors expressed remorse for their decision and shared that they did not know the details and circumstances surrounding Ochoa's confession. They assert that Ochoa's lengthy interrogation "was characterized by lies about inculpatory evidence and threats that were used for hours against him." None of this information was revealed to them during the trial because the entire interrogation had not been recorded. They suggested that recording of interrogations would eliminate this problem. However, rule changes would merely be a bandaid on the wounds of injustice and not the ternicate that is needed.
Why the letters from Marino, the true culprit, went unanswered for over two years is indicative of the problem with most wrongful convictions. For officers to constantly threaten a suspect, disregarding the possibility that the suspect's protestations regarding his innocence might be true, is indicative of the problem - paradigm paralysis. Paradigm paralysis typically occurs when there is an inability or refusal to see beyond current models of thinking. Many in our criminal justice system would rather an innocent man be found guilty than a guilty man go free. They presume everyone guilty until proven innocent.
This mindset, and the unwillingness to change from it, is what under girds a prosecutor's desire to hide evidence that is exculpatory. It is why a prosecutor might refuse to test DNA or other scientific evidence because a negative result might weaken their case. It is why a prosecutor might rely on intimidation and threats to coerce a plea. Simply put....it is why we have wrongful convictions.
Rule changes might calm some of the winds of the storm of false convictions, but what is needed is a paradigm shift. Craig Watkins, the Dallas County District Attorney, advocated criminalizing the failure to disclose Brady Material. Prosecutors who were discovered to have suppressed exculpatory evidence could face criminal charges under Watkins' approach. Supris
ingly, Dallas County leads the nation in DNA exonerations. Perhaps it was witnessing all of the men who had lost so many years of their lives, crying and recounting their experiences, that caused Watkins to value avoiding the innocent being convicted. Watkins' objections to business as usual when he took over the District Attorney's Office in Dallas County were SUSTAINED!
ingly, Dallas County leads the nation in DNA exonerations. Perhaps it was witnessing all of the men who had lost so many years of their lives, crying and recounting their experiences, that caused Watkins to value avoiding the innocent being convicted. Watkins' objections to business as usual when he took over the District Attorney's Office in Dallas County were SUSTAINED!In Houston, there simply have not been nearly as many DNA exonerations as in Dallas. This has been the case because Harris County's Criminal Justice System values avoiding the guilty going free; even at the cost of innocent people being convicted. Unlike in Dallas, the Houston Police Department had a policy of destroying biological samples. Moreover, the DA in Dallas took steps to make biological samples available for testing by the innocence project.
Here, the Houston Crime Lab was largely ignored and understaffed. Our Former DA Chuck Rosenthal thought scientific evidence wasn't important enough to get a reputable lab involved even after scandal was revealed in the HPD lab. Appellate Courts reversed Harris County convictions for Brady violations and prosecutorial misconduct on multiple occasions and the DA's office took no action against the prosecutors who were the alleged offenders. It is representative of a model of thinking that needs to change. Watkins' suggested approach might change values. If not, a jail cell certainly would.
2 comments: