EDITORIAL: "Court of Inquiry and the Michael Morton case: Details of case that sent an innocent man to prison should put prosecutors on notice," published by the Houston Chronicle on February 8, 2013.
GIST: "The court of inquiry has turned out to be an excellent vehicle for bringing transparency to a much-needed public examination into then-D.A. Anderson's actions. Rusty Hardin, one of Houston's top criminal defense attorneys, has vigorously laid out detailed accounts of how Anderson built a case on false assumptions and faulty evidence while vigorously acting to keep the defense from obtaining documents that would have helped their case. Anderson even went so far as to keep the deputy who was the lead investigator from testifying because he would have been required to turn over the deputy's reports, including the ones on the son's account and of the suspicious stranger. Meanwhile, Anderson's attorneys have mounted a vigorous and capable defense of their client, bringing out mitigating facts that had not been made public. Even if Anderson is not found to have committed any crime, other prosecutors should be sobered by the detailed public account of how badly he botched this case - and the horrible consequences that resulted. The possibility that they could suffer such public exposure should make them cautious."
The entire editorial can be found at: GIST: "The court of inquiry has turned out to be an excellent vehicle for bringing transparency to a much-needed public examination into then-D.A. Anderson's actions. Rusty Hardin, one of Houston's top criminal defense attorneys, has vigorously laid out detailed accounts of how Anderson built a case on false assumptions and faulty evidence while vigorously acting to keep the defense from obtaining documents that would have helped their case. Anderson even went so far as to keep the deputy who was the lead investigator from testifying because he would have been required to turn over the deputy's reports, including the ones on the son's account and of the suspicious stranger. Meanwhile, Anderson's attorneys have mounted a vigorous and capable defense of their client, bringing out mitigating facts that had not been made public. Even if Anderson is not found to have committed any crime, other prosecutors should be sobered by the detailed public account of how badly he botched this case - and the horrible consequences that resulted. The possibility that they could suffer such public exposure should make them cautious."
http://www.chron.com/default/article/Court-of-inquiry-and-the-Michael-Morton-case-4264448.php
Wikipedia entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Morton_%28criminal_justice%29
PUBLISHER'S NOTE
I have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses several thousand posts. The search box is located near the bottom of the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and myself get more out of the site.
The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at:
http://www.thestar.com/topic/
Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
http://smithforensic.blogspot.
Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.
