--------------------
Moving To Stop Wrong
Convictions
--------------------
By Sean Gardiner
Staff Writer
December 10, 2002
A rash of wrong-man
cases in Brooklyn -- six murder convictions reversed in the last five years --
has been "a very, very eye-opening experience" for Brooklyn District
Attorney Charles Hynes, he said recently.
Since five of the
cases relied largely on single eyewitnesses, Hynes decided about a year ago to
make a change: All one-witness felony cases must be approved by him.
Now, he said, he is
considering the bigger step of changing traditional lineups to a
"double-blind" system.
That means officers
showing the lineup know nothing about the case, so they can't influence
witnesses.
And witnesses are
told the suspect may not be included, so they may be less likely to pick
someone out if they aren't sure.
"We don't have
enough empirical data to suggest this is the best way to do it," Hynes
said in a recent interview, "but the double-blind procedure seems to make
the most sense." He said he'll probably decide whether to adopt it early next
year.
Such changes are
among an array of measures -- from raising the pay of court-appointed lawyers
to setting up public "innocence commissions" -- that defense
attorneys say could help prevent wrongful convictions.
Law enforcement
officials generally say they are wary of changing long-established procedures
because there is no proof the changes would help.
The issue of
preventing "wrong-man" cases gained new urgency last week when
Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau recommended throwing out the
convictions of five young men in the 1989 Central Park jogger case.
Some of the
suggested measures -- including videotaping all police interrogations of
suspects -- might have had an impact in the jogger case. In that case, four of
the five suspects, then teenagers, gave videotaped admissions after
interrogations that were not taped.
Their advocates
later said they had been tricked or coerced before the tape started rolling,
which detectives denied.
In a study of 70
"wrong-man" cases around the country that were reversed through DNA
evidence, 15 percent involved false or forced confessions, said Barry Scheck,
co-founder of the Innocence Project, a network of lawyers based at Benjamin
Cardozo law school.
The NYPD is studying
the issue, according to Deputy Chief Michael Collins, a police spokesman. He
said the subject of videotaping interrogations in custodial situations has been
brought to Police Commissioner Ray Kelly's attention in recent weeks and Kelly
ordered his people to examine it.
Law enforcers
generally fear videotaping will make suspects less inclined to talk, making
convictions harder.
That was the concern
in Minneapolis in 1994 when the Minnesota Supreme Court ordered recording of
all police interrogations. But Hennepin County Attorney Amy Klobuchar, who
oversees prosecutions in Minneapolis, said it hasn't worked out that way.
"Eight years of
experience has shown that the videotaped interrogations has protected
defendants' rights," she said, "and, most importantly to us, has
aided police and prosecutors in gaining convictions."
Videotaping has
eliminated most claims of police coercion or constitutional rights violations,
she said.
Klobuchar said
they've lost a few cases when the tape showed an officer erred on a procedure
such as the reading of a suspect's rights, but she said officers can still use
their old tricks, such as falsely saying they have information linking a
suspect to the crime.
The difference, she
said, is they now have to explain to the jury that such techniques are common
and legal.
Another measure
touted by defense attorneys is sequential lineups, in which the witness views
each person alone, one after another, instead of viewing people in groups, like
the traditional six person lineup the New York Police Department uses.
With a group lineup,
witnesses "tend to identify the subject who most resembles the
perpetrator," even if the perpetrator isn't present, said David Feige, of
the Bronx Defenders, a non-profit group that handles indigent defendants.
That's because people assume the criminal is in the group, he said.
But if you look at
photos or possible suspects one by one, "you're comparing each person
against your memory, not against each other," Feige said.
New Jersey adopted
double-blind sequential lineups last year, the only state to do so, after a
study found that witness misidentification accounted for about 70 percent of
wrongful convictions later reversed on DNA evidence.
In New York, a bill
mandating sequential lineups was shot down by state legislators last year but
is expected to be reintroduced next month.
For now, many in the
city's law enforcement community mirror Queens District Attorney Richard
Brown's view that more research is needed before they can decide.
"I'll be the
first one to admit to you that identification, or misidentification, is the
fundamental basis for wrong-man convictions," he said, "but I have
not concluded in my mind that sequential lineups are justified as opposed to
procedures which have been used for years."
Last fall, Brooklyn
Supreme Court Justice Robert Kreindler ordered one of the city's first
sequential lineups in a pre-trial hearing in the murder case of teenager Rahim
Thomas.
To get around that
decision, the Brooklyn District Attorney's Office indicted Thomas without the
lineup identification, then got the trial judge to okay using a standard police
lineup.
Kreindler said he
has read more about the lineup issue since his ruling and is now unsure whether
sequential lineups are superior.
In the last year,
Brooklyn prosecutors have observed Toronto's use of double-blind sequential
lineups, Hynes said, and thought it appeared superior to the city's practice
"not so much because it is sequential but because it is a double-blind
procedure."
Hynes said he's open
to any sensible idea when it comes to preventing or righting wrongful
convictions.
"I have no
trouble with any post-conviction remedy that tests the question of do we have
an innocent person in jail," he said. "... If you've got one person
sitting in jail that shouldn't be there, the system has done a terrible
thing."
Hynes said he
started a DNA unit about a year ago, but no cases have been overturned through
it.
Over the past year,
Hynes said, he has rejected 15 out of 70 single-eyewitness cases because the
witness was not credible enough.
If the witness
didn't know the accused, he said, he asks questions about lighting, how long
the incident took, and the perpetrator's clothing, height, weight and
distinctive features, trying to make sure the identification is solid.
When the witness
knows the suspect it can be just as sticky, he said.
"You have to
probe very carefully," Hynes said. "Is there any animus, is there a
broken drug deal, did this guy steal his girlfriend?"
The District
Attorneys in the other boroughs have made no recent changes to prevent or right
wrong-man convictions, their representatives said.
In all the city
District Attorneys' offices, a claim of wrongful conviction is investigated by
a supervisor from the bureau that originally handled the case.
Brown, the Queens
DA, said the cases are so rare, he doesn't see a problem with the current
review system.
Defense attorneys
say there should be more distance between those who handled the cases
originally and those who reinvestigate them.
An unjust conviction
should be treated like a judicial train wreck, Scheck said.
"Every time a
plane falls from the sky or a train crashes, they bring in an organization like
the National Safety Transportation Board and they ask the questions 'What went
wrong? How can we fix it?'" said Scheck.
After a judicial
catastrophe, he said, "Judges just cut orders, and people just walk out of
jail. And that's supposed to be the end of it."
Each state should
create an innocence commission, a panel with subpoena power and a staff, like
the NTSB, to investigate every wrongful conviction, find out what went wrong
and suggest ways to correct those problems, he said.
Canada and England
already have such commissions.
"It's a very
simple idea," Scheck said, "but a very powerful one."
In North Carolina,
the state's chief justice last month convened an innocence commission to review
criminal procedures and propose changes. The group, created after several
wrong-man cases in the state, is not designed to investigate individual cases.
Gregory Lasak, a
Queens prosecutor who has reinvestigated many wrong-man cases, said he thinks
New York doesn't need the kind of innocence panel suggested by Scheck . With
its members most likely appointed by the governor, he said, it might politicize
questions of guilt and innocence.
Lasak, who is
executive assistant district attorney in Queens, said district attorneys are
best situated to right wrongful convictions. Besides, he said, they are
elected, "making them accountable to the people."
Copyright (c) 2002, Newsday, Inc.